Hopefully scotland, like many places, gets its academics from all around. England, for one.
Indeed, but what is the 'right' proportion to have? Is matching the demographics the end point? Surely not. But if making a comparison that it is far too low by making a comparison to a place and time with very different demographics, it suggests some other figure is sought , and if so what figure are we talking about? Is 5% 'enough'? Presumably there's no upper limit but the statement suggests there is a lower limit.
Edit: the Prof's comments are clearly to be read in the journalist's report's context.
Thanks. I do agree with not restricting themselves to measuring against the UK's demographics, but I don't really buy the argument presented here about basis of comparison - that feels like setting themselves up for an unfair comparison even if they achieve great strides in diversity.
The report says the increasing diversity in the university’s population “does not benefit Black staff and students” yet Edinburgh prides itself on being a “global institution”. That means it should measure progress against the world’s demographics too. “While there is a dominant white racial majority in the UK, and especially in Scotland, the basis of comparison must not presume that small numbers of non-white racial and ethnic minorities in Scotland offer an appropriate baseline for comparison.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
The grand historical irony here is that Jews have always been at the intellectual forefront of multiracial policies in the West. See the history of migration law across the western world, in particular America - the liberalisation (and the ending of favouritism for whites/Europeans) was driven by Jewish intellectuals (and others, of course)
This was for very sensible reasons, or so it seemed back in the day. Firstly a lot of Jews firmly believed in the intrinsic good of multiracial societies, and secondly many Jews felt that they would be safer in pluralistic, diverse countries, where they would be just one minority amongst many. Ergo, less exposed. Less likely to be persecuted
However, and in the end, these policies have led to the west importing lots of anti-Semites, and lots of voters who pressure their governments to take anti-Israel positions
You know what the definition of insanity is.
Posting braindead crap night after night whilst simultaneously claiming superior intelligence?
The grand historical irony here is that Jews have always been at the intellectual forefront of multiracial policies in the West. See the history of migration law across the western world, in particular America - the liberalisation (and the ending of favouritism for whites/Europeans) was driven by Jewish intellectuals (and others, of course)
This was for very sensible reasons, or so it seemed back in the day. Firstly a lot of Jews firmly believed in the intrinsic good of multiracial societies, and secondly many Jews felt that they would be safer in pluralistic, diverse countries, where they would be just one minority amongst many. Ergo, less exposed. Less likely to be persecuted
However, and in the end, these policies have led to the west importing lots of anti-Semites, and lots of voters who pressure their governments to take anti-Israel positions
You know what the definition of insanity is.
Posting braindead crap night after night whilst simultaneously claiming superior intelligence?
I suppose in Starmer's head it sounds stern - you leave us with no other choice, Israel, but to recognise a Palestinian state unless... - but in reality it just looks equivocal, like everything about Starmer's government. Our position is we're not quite sure of our position.
The value bet, surely, is on the Reformed Conservatives, led by Nigel Farage to win the next election.
If the Conservative Party is staring defeat in the face in late 2027, and it is clear that a merger with Reform will save a *lot* of MPs jobs, then it becomes the most likely outcome.
But why would Nige/Reform want to take that baggage, I'm sure they'll accept a few defections but in the run up to the election does he really want to be bogged down with MPs who were in the previous government that oversaw 2m net migration in 3 years?
Because he'd inherit the Conservatives money and infrastructure, and eliminate the only competition on the right. So long as he was the one in charge, then Reform voters would go with it.
But he'll get that after the election anyway if the polls stay consistent.
He gets the certainty of Number 10, against the probability of it.
For a man who probably doesn't have two election campaigns ahead of him, that will look pretty attractive.
i agree. Farage would likely take that. It would also give him extra respectability. So it's win-win for both rightwing parties - it saves the Tories (after a fashion) and ushers Nige into Number 10
Instant 40% plus in the polls. A tempter for Farage and the Tories. Given it hands him the keys to number 10, the Tories could probably extract much more than they should from any such deal.
They would secure continued employment for most of their MPs. And Jenrick would probably secure himself a senior Cabinet role post election.
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
As grown ups who can easily bypass this stuff, aren't particularly concerned by the consequences, and who are able to ignore content that we find disturbing, it may appear just a stupid over the top inconvenience, but if you do want to at least present the positive case...
1. Kids aren't all super tech savvy, and the "one kid who knows" rule doesn't mean that everyone can follow their instructions. That's particularly applicable to pre-teens. It's also not as common to restrict access to the internet on phones or tablets, but restricted access to apps is often the default for younger kids, and that does make things a touch less simple.
2. Not every kid wants to see adult material. An 11 year old who googles "feeling down", may want to see funny videos of dogs, rather than have some uncaring algorithm take their hand, and guide them gradually towards self-harm videos.
The 'fence' might be easy to climb, but younger kids are less likely to be able to climb over it. For kids who can climb over it, there will be plenty who won't, because they don't want to break the law , they fear the consequences of being caught by parents, or they simply don't want to do the wrong thing. For some kids, they don't want to go over the fence at all, so having it there makes it less likely they'll accidentally find themselves on the other side, in an adult world which they might struggle to ignore.
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
As grown ups who can easily bypass this stuff, aren't particularly concerned by the consequences, and who are able to ignore content that we find disturbing, it may appear just a stupid over the top inconvenience, but if you do want to at least present the positive case...
1. Kids aren't all super tech savvy, and the "one kid who knows" rule doesn't mean that everyone can follow their instructions. That's particularly applicable to pre-teens. It's also not as common to restrict access to the internet on phones or tablets, but access to apps is often the default for younger kids, and that does make things a touch less simple.
2. Not every kid wants to see adult material. An 11 year old who googles "feeling down", may want to see funny videos of dogs, rather than have some uncaring algorithm take their hand, and guide them gradually towards self-harm videos.
The 'fence' might be easy to climb, but younger kids are less likely to be able to climb over it. For kids who can climb over it, there will be plenty who won't, because they don't want to break the law , they fear the consequences of being caught by parents, or they simply don't want to do the wrong thing. For some kids, they don't want to go over the fence at all, so having it there makes it less likely they'll accidentally find themselves on the other side, in an adult world which they might struggle to ignore.
Appreciable balance, though I remain unconvinced much of it is not just untech savvy politicians raging.
The value bet, surely, is on the Reformed Conservatives, led by Nigel Farage to win the next election.
If the Conservative Party is staring defeat in the face in late 2027, and it is clear that a merger with Reform will save a *lot* of MPs jobs, then it becomes the most likely outcome.
But why would Nige/Reform want to take that baggage, I'm sure they'll accept a few defections but in the run up to the election does he really want to be bogged down with MPs who were in the previous government that oversaw 2m net migration in 3 years?
Because he'd inherit the Conservatives money and infrastructure, and eliminate the only competition on the right. So long as he was the one in charge, then Reform voters would go with it.
But he'll get that after the election anyway if the polls stay consistent.
He gets the certainty of Number 10, against the probability of it.
For a man who probably doesn't have two election campaigns ahead of him, that will look pretty attractive.
i agree. Farage would likely take that. It would also give him extra respectability. So it's win-win for both rightwing parties - it saves the Tories (after a fashion) and ushers Nige into Number 10
Instant 40% plus in the polls. A tempter for Farage and the Tories. Given it hands him the keys to number 10, the Tories could probably extract much more than they should from any such deal.
They would secure continued employment for most of their MPs. And Jenrick would probably secure himself a senior Cabinet role post election.
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
Obviously it can be avoided. Will it? We will see. Kemi's ratings are not in the toilet, she isnt the problem. Recent history is.
A fairly detailed look at Reform UK running Kent, in the Kent & Surrey Bylines ultralocal site. It's a part of the Byeline Times network, so broadly sceptical. Mainly of interest because Kent are the first to get Dolged.
One of Reform’s repeated claims was that the previous Tory-run council had been thriftless and improvident. spending resources inappropriately. Even the Tories’ opponents, though, reject that charge. Sevenoaks Liberal Democrat councillor Richard Streatfeild dismissed Reform’s promises to cut waste and excessive spending, as “based on the false claims that Kent Council was wasteful. But years of austerity have seen local government finances slashed by 40 per cent. So there is now simply no waste or fat to cut” he insists.
Kent County Council currently has a budget totalling £1.6bn, but only 5% of that can be spent on “discretionary services”. So most of the funds are earmarked for essential issues such as education and adult services.
Look hard enough and you can still find things, but there's so much that is simply out of the hands of local councils - experienced parties still overpromise what they can do too, but may be more prepared internally at least for more realistic achievements. This being a case in point.
“I’m not entirely convinced it’s the right thing for Kent”, [The Leader] said. “I will be making it my priority to find out as much as I can over the coming weeks and months to help formulate our response to LGR.”
In truth, the final decision on reorganisation is out of her hands and in Whitehall’s. But to no one’s surprise, Kemkaran attempted to kick the proposals down the road. Claiming the November deadline was “almost impossible” to meet, she pleaded for it to be postponed until March. She got short shrift and a “hard no” from local government minister Jim McMahon, who told her to get on with it.
The video lays that angle on with butter - he has a habit of reading something out from a local media peace and just sitting there in silence for 3 or 4 seconds.
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
Beyond terrible. Another post passed as we sleepwalk our way into the totalitarian surveillance state. And all to appease earnestly woke do-gooders who wouldn't recognise a VPL if it joined them for breakfast.
The value bet, surely, is on the Reformed Conservatives, led by Nigel Farage to win the next election.
If the Conservative Party is staring defeat in the face in late 2027, and it is clear that a merger with Reform will save a *lot* of MPs jobs, then it becomes the most likely outcome.
But why would Nige/Reform want to take that baggage, I'm sure they'll accept a few defections but in the run up to the election does he really want to be bogged down with MPs who were in the previous government that oversaw 2m net migration in 3 years?
Because he'd inherit the Conservatives money and infrastructure, and eliminate the only competition on the right. So long as he was the one in charge, then Reform voters would go with it.
But he'll get that after the election anyway if the polls stay consistent.
He gets the certainty of Number 10, against the probability of it.
For a man who probably doesn't have two election campaigns ahead of him, that will look pretty attractive.
i agree. Farage would likely take that. It would also give him extra respectability. So it's win-win for both rightwing parties - it saves the Tories (after a fashion) and ushers Nige into Number 10
Instant 40% plus in the polls. A tempter for Farage and the Tories. Given it hands him the keys to number 10, the Tories could probably extract much more than they should from any such deal.
They would secure continued employment for most of their MPs. And Jenrick would probably secure himself a senior Cabinet role post election.
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
The strategic blind alley in which Israel finds itself. It can defend itself, with help, but if that help evaporates (or simply turns away) do they have the ability or the will to come to a settled arrangement with it's neighbours. Para Bellum only gets you so far.
The strategic blind alley in which Israel finds itself. It can defend itself, with help, but if that help evaporates (or simply turns away) do they have the ability or the will to come to a settled arrangement with it's neighbours. Para Bellum only gets you so far.
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
As grown ups who can easily bypass this stuff, aren't particularly concerned by the consequences, and who are able to ignore content that we find disturbing, it may appear just a stupid over the top inconvenience, but if you do want to at least present the positive case...
1. Kids aren't all super tech savvy, and the "one kid who knows" rule doesn't mean that everyone can follow their instructions. That's particularly applicable to pre-teens. It's also not as common to restrict access to the internet on phones or tablets, but access to apps is often the default for younger kids, and that does make things a touch less simple.
2. Not every kid wants to see adult material. An 11 year old who googles "feeling down", may want to see funny videos of dogs, rather than have some uncaring algorithm take their hand, and guide them gradually towards self-harm videos.
The 'fence' might be easy to climb, but younger kids are less likely to be able to climb over it. For kids who can climb over it, there will be plenty who won't, because they don't want to break the law , they fear the consequences of being caught by parents, or they simply don't want to do the wrong thing. For some kids, they don't want to go over the fence at all, so having it there makes it less likely they'll accidentally find themselves on the other side, in an adult world which they might struggle to ignore.
Appreciable balance, though I remain unconvinced much of it is not just untech savvy politicians raging.
Well, I'm pretty tech savvy (computing degree, and was in web development for over a decade), and also have kids at uni, and at primary school. I've a good idea what they could and couldn't do, and the restrictions that a range of parents put on their kids tech access. Any barrier will help in some way, and while not being naïve about how motivated some kids will be, I'm also fairly sure that even a minimal barrier will put off many.
I suppose in Starmer's head it sounds stern - you leave us with no other choice, Israel, but to recognise a Palestinian state unless... - but in reality it just looks equivocal, like everything about Starmer's government. Our position is we're not quite sure of our position.
It is a bit odd. A Palestinian state as punishment for the Israelis. Although there is a certain symmetry given the state of Israel has rather become a punishment for the Palestinians.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
"No, YOU'RE fucked! Confined to infirmary. Quarantined."
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
I would say like. Stepmom on Pornhub, but I can’t access it any more 🥲
The value bet, surely, is on the Reformed Conservatives, led by Nigel Farage to win the next election.
If the Conservative Party is staring defeat in the face in late 2027, and it is clear that a merger with Reform will save a *lot* of MPs jobs, then it becomes the most likely outcome.
But why would Nige/Reform want to take that baggage, I'm sure they'll accept a few defections but in the run up to the election does he really want to be bogged down with MPs who were in the previous government that oversaw 2m net migration in 3 years?
Because he'd inherit the Conservatives money and infrastructure, and eliminate the only competition on the right. So long as he was the one in charge, then Reform voters would go with it.
But he'll get that after the election anyway if the polls stay consistent.
He gets the certainty of Number 10, against the probability of it.
For a man who probably doesn't have two election campaigns ahead of him, that will look pretty attractive.
i agree. Farage would likely take that. It would also give him extra respectability. So it's win-win for both rightwing parties - it saves the Tories (after a fashion) and ushers Nige into Number 10
Instant 40% plus in the polls. A tempter for Farage and the Tories. Given it hands him the keys to number 10, the Tories could probably extract much more than they should from any such deal.
They would secure continued employment for most of their MPs. And Jenrick would probably secure himself a senior Cabinet role post election.
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
Surely a new RefCon Party keeps everyone happy, except lefties and centrists who will be out of government for the remainder of my lifetime. I'm 63.
The value bet, surely, is on the Reformed Conservatives, led by Nigel Farage to win the next election.
If the Conservative Party is staring defeat in the face in late 2027, and it is clear that a merger with Reform will save a *lot* of MPs jobs, then it becomes the most likely outcome.
But why would Nige/Reform want to take that baggage, I'm sure they'll accept a few defections but in the run up to the election does he really want to be bogged down with MPs who were in the previous government that oversaw 2m net migration in 3 years?
Because he'd inherit the Conservatives money and infrastructure, and eliminate the only competition on the right. So long as he was the one in charge, then Reform voters would go with it.
But he'll get that after the election anyway if the polls stay consistent.
He gets the certainty of Number 10, against the probability of it.
For a man who probably doesn't have two election campaigns ahead of him, that will look pretty attractive.
i agree. Farage would likely take that. It would also give him extra respectability. So it's win-win for both rightwing parties - it saves the Tories (after a fashion) and ushers Nige into Number 10
Instant 40% plus in the polls. A tempter for Farage and the Tories. Given it hands him the keys to number 10, the Tories could probably extract much more than they should from any such deal.
They would secure continued employment for most of their MPs. And Jenrick would probably secure himself a senior Cabinet role post election.
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
Surely a new RefCon Party keeps everyone happy, except lefties and centrists who will be out of government for the remainder of my lifetime. I'm 63.
Is that because the NHS will collapse due to lack of funding and you’ll die before you are 70?
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
The value bet, surely, is on the Reformed Conservatives, led by Nigel Farage to win the next election.
If the Conservative Party is staring defeat in the face in late 2027, and it is clear that a merger with Reform will save a *lot* of MPs jobs, then it becomes the most likely outcome.
But why would Nige/Reform want to take that baggage, I'm sure they'll accept a few defections but in the run up to the election does he really want to be bogged down with MPs who were in the previous government that oversaw 2m net migration in 3 years?
Because he'd inherit the Conservatives money and infrastructure, and eliminate the only competition on the right. So long as he was the one in charge, then Reform voters would go with it.
But he'll get that after the election anyway if the polls stay consistent.
He gets the certainty of Number 10, against the probability of it.
For a man who probably doesn't have two election campaigns ahead of him, that will look pretty attractive.
i agree. Farage would likely take that. It would also give him extra respectability. So it's win-win for both rightwing parties - it saves the Tories (after a fashion) and ushers Nige into Number 10
Instant 40% plus in the polls. A tempter for Farage and the Tories. Given it hands him the keys to number 10, the Tories could probably extract much more than they should from any such deal.
They would secure continued employment for most of their MPs. And Jenrick would probably secure himself a senior Cabinet role post election.
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
Surely a new RefCon Party keeps everyone happy, except lefties and centrists who will be out of government for the remainder of my lifetime. I'm 63.
Is that because the NHS will collapse due to lack of funding and you’ll die before you are 70?
I suspect Farage, Jenrick and the more enthusiastic PB Tories would take that as a win.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
Coming from you, a man who never ever expresses such serious concerns about the future makes that even more scary.
Oh wait.
Not saying you/he is wrong, but gives us the gist please?
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
Their 'fellow Arabs' in the West Bank and Gaza who are in their eyes hand in glove with their *real* enemies - Iran and Russia?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
Coming from you, a man who never ever expresses such serious concerns about the future makes that even more scary.
Oh wait.
Not saying you/he is wrong, but gives us the gist please?
Inevitable "bankruptcy", is the gist - we are simply running out of road, and already have some of the highest bond yields in the OECD, with many more negatives than most
We are like a cartoon character over the cliff. The legs are whirring, the horrible drop is waiting
My friend explained that the "bankruptcy" might come in several different forms
Missing the boat on this older post, but I think it was a good reminder for people who take 'devolution' spin at face value. It's not nothing, but it isn't what many people think it is either.
Like Greater Essex is a place, let alone one that needs a mayor. It almost makes one yearn for the days when towns demanded city status.
All part of Labour's push for unitary councils overseen by Mayors
I like the local government reorganisation, and think the goal of trying to bring together various different public sector areas into single geographies is laudable (if unrealistic, especially on the timescales they'd like), but the regional mayors just looks like a means of bypassing local councils to make it easier for Whitehall (and provide some high profile political jobs) rather than any actual need.
It is at least a consistent approach - everywhere in England will be covered by a mayor eventually - than the last government approach.
I believe the Mayor and combined authority are devolution of central government power, while the unitaries are mergers of existing county and district councils
In theory. The difference is that central government holds various theoretical powers - like the ability to call in local planning decisions if they have ‘strategic impact’ - which are rarely used. Similarly government could use its bully pulpit to comment on and effectively meddle in what local councils are deciding, but again this is rarely (but not never!) used. Active regional mayors are far more likely to use their powers - both hard and soft - to influence, or even override, what the councils in their area are deciding. Therefore while in legal terms it represents devolution of power, in practical application local councils will find that their freedom to act has been somewhat curtailed - exactly what happened in London when the mayoral/GLA tier was inserted above the boroughs.
The other dimension is that it is easier for a government to bribe or threaten a mayor, using the political process (rather than the mafia one - unless the government does actually have the photos…) to offer or withhold funding, grants and permissions, than it is to do that to a whole council.
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
Beyond terrible. Another post passed as we sleepwalk our way into the totalitarian surveillance state. And all to appease earnestly woke do-gooders who wouldn't recognise a VPL if it joined them for breakfast.
I don't really understand Starmer's position. Why pretend there are conditions on this decision and ones that won't be met. France is going to recognise Palestine at the same UN conference, now he has opened the door he isn't going to say no in such a venue. I don't really see what he gains by delaying the decision.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
I don't really understand Starmer's position. Why pretend there are conditions on this decision. France is going to recognise Palestine at the same UN conference, now he has opened the door he isn't going to say no in such a venue.
I certainly cannot see it winning over the formative new Left alliance party or whatever it will be called, for whom this issue is a major unifier of different factions.
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
Beyond terrible. Another post passed as we sleepwalk our way into the totalitarian surveillance state. And all to appease earnestly woke do-gooders who wouldn't recognise a VPL if it joined them for breakfast.
I see that recognition of a Palestinian state polls well, with majority support of every party apart from Reform, and even there it has substantial support.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
The latter might be a bit of a clue as to his identity.
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
It doesn't make sense at any level. That's *beyond* "Death Recorded" level of stupidity.
I presume it is part of the Americanisation of socio-political discourse.
There was someone ranting about the price of drugs in healthcare the other day, on Reddit. For the UK.
He exploded when various people pointed out that NHS bulk buys and gets very good prices on most things. When it was pointed out that some of the reforms to bulk buying and using generics happened under Thatcher - he nearly got banned by the mods. From his "points" he had obviously absorbed a lot of content about US healthcare.
I see that recognition of a Palestinian state polls well, with majority support of every party apart from Reform, and even there it has substantial support.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
Their 'fellow Arabs' in the West Bank and Gaza who are in their eyes hand in glove with their *real* enemies - Iran and Russia?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
That’s why Palestine, i.e. the West Bank, needs to be a sovereign independent country recognised by the rest of the World. Then, if Israel invades, they are invading a sovereign country, and should be treated like Russia. Their choice.
David Brindle @DavidJ_Brindle · 7h Almost 1 in 4 #socialcare jobs now held by non-EU overseas workers, @skillsforcare reports. Numbers doubled in just 2 years. Hard to see how sector will cope with visa clampdown.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
Well it's an apolitical fact that we're in a precarious debt position. So are several other developed nations.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
The latter might be a bit of a clue as to his identity.
He's worth north of £100 million. Maybe that will help
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
It doesn't make sense at any level. That's *beyond* "Death Recorded" level of stupidity.
I presume it is part of the Americanisation of socio-political discourse.
There was someone ranting about the price of drugs in healthcare the other day, on Reddit. For the UK.
He exploded when various people pointed out that NHS bulk buys and gets very good prices on most things. When it was pointed out that some of the reforms to bulk buying and using generics happened under Thatcher - he nearly got banned by the mods. From his "points" he had obviously absorbed a lot of content about US healthcare.
Giving the best possible case for the argument: you could perhaps argue that if the Jim Crow South can manage to appoint that many black people then a Scottish University drawing on the peoples of the British Empire ought to have at least managed reach that same low bar?
The racial make-up still doesn’t make any sense of course: the Scottish Universities should (by this argument) have been recruiting this fraction mostly from the Indian subcontinent, not people of African descent.
Vaguely on topic, with all the caveats about this being 2025 and the next election not likely before 2028 or even 2029 and the volume of water and the number of bridges said water has to pass under, there is a key point which is that we need to know in a fragmented electoral landscape what is happening at regional and even local level.
I'd argue even regional polling doesn't paint a complete picture but it's better than trying to extrapolate national polling.
Local council by elections offer some clues but they are often exceptional contests by their nature and the intervention of Independent candidates who would be unlikely to contest a GE muddies the waters somewhat.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
Well it's an apolitical fact that we're in a precarious debt position. So are several other developed nations.
It's not just the debt. It's an entire bleak shopping list of dysfunction
The Gazette has asked me to write about this thing called "the Online Safety Act"
Has anyone got any thoughts? I hear bad things
There are two different things to which the government wants to restrict access. One is porn, the other is social media where bullies and groomers abound according to the minister.
The Act places great obligations on tech media companies including pb not to host illegal content or hurty words, and this has already caused some closures and is liable to upset the American government which is protective of free speech for tech bros who donated into Trump's campaign funds.
How to prove age, by the site directly or indirectly via third party apps. Issues around safety of uploaded docs from hackers, blackmailers and ID thieves. Have a look at what the porn sites say they have done.
Use of free or paid for VPNs to circumvent restrictions by making users appear to be in other countries. Most VPNs are controlled by only two companies, iirc. This would apply to social media as well as porn. Can't ban VPNs as needed for legitimate cybersecurity reasons when accessing remote servers as in WFH or for children, school-FH.
Tory measure enthusiastically adopted by Labour. No evidence ministers in either party have a bleeding clue. Is it noteworthy that Kemi was or is sceptical as she has a background in computing iirc?
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
Well it's an apolitical fact that we're in a precarious debt position. So are several other developed nations.
It's not just the debt. It's an entire bleak shopping list of dysfunction
Did some big boys scare you today on the bus to New Cross?
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
It doesn't make sense at any level. That's *beyond* "Death Recorded" level of stupidity.
I presume it is part of the Americanisation of socio-political discourse.
There was someone ranting about the price of drugs in healthcare the other day, on Reddit. For the UK.
He exploded when various people pointed out that NHS bulk buys and gets very good prices on most things. When it was pointed out that some of the reforms to bulk buying and using generics happened under Thatcher - he nearly got banned by the mods. From his "points" he had obviously absorbed a lot of content about US healthcare.
Giving the best possible case for the argument: you could perhaps argue that if the Jim Crow South can manage to appoint that many black people then a Scottish University drawing on the peoples of the British Empire ought to have at least managed reach that same low bar?
The racial make-up still doesn’t make any sense of course: the Scottish Universities should (by this argument) have been recruiting this fraction mostly from the Indian subcontinent, not people of African descent.
I don't understand that - are you saying that Scottish universities should have more ethnic diversity than the Scottish population, due to international students/fellows?
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
The latter might be a bit of a clue as to his identity.
He's worth north of £100 million. Maybe that will help
I suppose in Starmer's head it sounds stern - you leave us with no other choice, Israel, but to recognise a Palestinian state unless... - but in reality it just looks equivocal, like everything about Starmer's government. Our position is we're not quite sure of our position.
It is pathetic, Netanyahoo will be pissing himself laughing.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
The latter might be a bit of a clue as to his identity.
He's worth north of £100 million. Maybe that will help
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
It’s the fact that the comparison is being made by an academic, who is likely to be intelligent and well-informed, that leads me to conclude it’s being made in bad faith. He is not ignorant.
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
It doesn't make sense at any level. That's *beyond* "Death Recorded" level of stupidity.
I presume it is part of the Americanisation of socio-political discourse.
There was someone ranting about the price of drugs in healthcare the other day, on Reddit. For the UK.
He exploded when various people pointed out that NHS bulk buys and gets very good prices on most things. When it was pointed out that some of the reforms to bulk buying and using generics happened under Thatcher - he nearly got banned by the mods. From his "points" he had obviously absorbed a lot of content about US healthcare.
Giving the best possible case for the argument: you could perhaps argue that if the Jim Crow South can manage to appoint that many black people then a Scottish University drawing on the peoples of the British Empire ought to have at least managed reach that same low bar?
The racial make-up still doesn’t make any sense of course: the Scottish Universities should (by this argument) have been recruiting this fraction mostly from the Indian subcontinent, not people of African descent.
Utter bollox trying to rig these things with sticking any Tom , Dick or Harry in place or importing foreigners to try and look woke whilst ignoring talent that actually live in the place. Racial fcukwittery.
David Brindle @DavidJ_Brindle · 7h Almost 1 in 4 #socialcare jobs now held by non-EU overseas workers, @skillsforcare reports. Numbers doubled in just 2 years. Hard to see how sector will cope with visa clampdown.
I see it has been another stonking day for 'one term latest".
You'll have to explain today's developments.
From my perspective today is the first day that Team Starmer have got anything right regarding Gaza/Israel since the seventh of October 2023.
I was thinking of the way they not only brought Saville back into the discussion (forgetting perhaps that many in public think Starmer had something to do with letting him get away with it all for years) but then they doubled down on it later in the day. Just nuts.
As to Gaza - I have no idea whether it will help or not.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
Their 'fellow Arabs' in the West Bank and Gaza who are in their eyes hand in glove with their *real* enemies - Iran and Russia?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
That’s why Palestine, i.e. the West Bank, needs to be a sovereign independent country recognised by the rest of the World. Then, if Israel invades, they are invading a sovereign country, and should be treated like Russia. Their choice.
I always wonder why all the Arab states hate Palestinians and never lift a finger to help them.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
Their 'fellow Arabs' in the West Bank and Gaza who are in their eyes hand in glove with their *real* enemies - Iran and Russia?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
That’s why Palestine, i.e. the West Bank, needs to be a sovereign independent country recognised by the rest of the World. Then, if Israel invades, they are invading a sovereign country, and should be treated like Russia. Their choice.
Ironically Russia supports an independent Palestine, as does China.
Starmer clearly moving to recognise such a Palestinian state unless Israel moves to a ceasefire to stop any momentum for Corbyn
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
The latter might be a bit of a clue as to his identity.
He's worth north of £100 million. Maybe that will help
I see that recognition of a Palestinian state polls well, with majority support of every party apart from Reform, and even there it has substantial support.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
Well it's an apolitical fact that we're in a precarious debt position. So are several other developed nations.
It's not just the debt. It's an entire bleak shopping list of dysfunction
Did some big boys scare you today on the bus to New Cross?
No
I actually had a delightful day with my older daughter. She’s quite goth and said she wanted to see one of the “magnificent seven” cemeteries of london (she’s already seen Highgate)
So we met at Borough market - insanely crowded and busy and fun - then got a train through Peckham to Nunhead. And Nunhead cemetery. That was as eerily overgrown and evocative as promised, then we came back to town
And this is where I had the biggest jolt of positive energy. Elephant and castle. Has anyone been recently????
It’s amazing. They’ve turned one of the worst toilets in london into a plush new neighbourhood of lovely apartment blocks and elegant squares and swish new gardens. It looks like a rich new burb in, say, Melbourne or Vancouver. And this is elephant and bleeding castle. What happened to the barrier blocks and smack dealers?!?
It all felt very affluent and agreeable and multiracial in a GOOD way. London at its best
So I actually hied home feeling quite upbeat about London and the UK. And then my friend gave me his brutal diagnosis of Britain’s future
They picked a hot woman who is well known because she has been in some big hit tv shows to advertise some clothes. There ain't anything deeper than that.
I see that recognition of a Palestinian state polls well, with majority support of every party apart from Reform, and even there it has substantial support.
I see it has been another stonking day for 'one term latest".
You'll have to explain today's developments.
From my perspective today is the first day that Team Starmer have got anything right regarding Gaza/Israel since the seventh of October 2023.
I was thinking of the way they not only brought Saville back into the discussion (forgetting perhaps that many in public think Starmer had something to do with letting him get away with it all for years) but then they doubled down on it later in the day. Just nuts.
As to Gaza - I have no idea whether it will help or not.
I am not sure Kyle didn't know exactly the reaction he would elicit from Farage. From my side of the divide Farage came across as a bellyaching Trump clone who claims victimhood at every opportunity.
I see that recognition of a Palestinian state polls well, with majority support of every party apart from Reform, and even there it has substantial support.
I sense those whose endless chorus is that the libtards have for far too long ignored the will of the people will feel it’s time to ignore the wrongheaded nitwits in this case.
Vaguely on topic, with all the caveats about this being 2025 and the next election not likely before 2028 or even 2029 and the volume of water and the number of bridges said water has to pass under, there is a key point which is that we need to know in a fragmented electoral landscape what is happening at regional and even local level.
I'd argue even regional polling doesn't paint a complete picture but it's better than trying to extrapolate national polling.
Local council by elections offer some clues but they are often exceptional contests by their nature and the intervention of Independent candidates who would be unlikely to contest a GE muddies the waters somewhat.
The May elections for councils and Mayors plus the local by elections give a bit of a flavour, but not enough because there's that nagging chunk who just don't turn out for locals. The YouGov regional subsamples are at least weighted so I normally keep half an eye on them 'for very broad trends only' Id say very broadly actual votes being cast reflect the poll order we currently see with the government being punished harder as you'd expect,and that very broadly speaking there is no sign of 1) a Tory recovery outside a few isolated locales (Rushcliffe went very well for them in May for example) 2) the LD coalition of votes that won them 72 seats fracturing yet 3) Labour being a dead cert anywhere 4) no go Reform areas
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
Well it's an apolitical fact that we're in a precarious debt position. So are several other developed nations.
It's not just the debt. It's an entire bleak shopping list of dysfunction
Did some big boys scare you today on the bus to New Cross?
No
I actually had a delightful day with my older daughter. She’s quite goth and said she wanted to see one of the “magnificent seven” cemeteries of london (she’s already seen Highgate)
So we met at Borough market - insanely crowded and busy and fun - then got a train through Peckham to Nunhead. And Nunhead cemetery. That was as eerily overgrown and evocative as promised, then we came back to town
And this is where I had the biggest jolt of positive energy. Elephant and castle. Has anyone been recently????
It’s amazing. They’ve turned one of the worst toilets in london into a plush new neighbourhood of lovely apartment blocks and elegant squares and swish new gardens. It looks like a rich new burb in, say, Melbourne or Vancouver. And this is elephant and bleeding castle. What happened to the barrier blocks and smack dealers?!?
It all felt very affluent and agreeable and multiracial in a GOOD way. London at its best
So I actually hied home feeling quite upbeat about London and the UK. And then my friend gave me his brutal diagnosis of Britain’s future
I’ve just read the article, and to draw such a comparison, between modern Scotland, and Jim Crow era America, with its very different demographic and socio-economic profile, seems like an argument made in bad faith to me.
I'm just not sure what is gained by the analogy in the context made, even within the wider article. Bearing in mind an experienced academic said it in that context they presumably think it a great point, but at best it seems a distraction to me from broader and more positive arguments being sought.
It doesn't make sense at any level. That's *beyond* "Death Recorded" level of stupidity.
I presume it is part of the Americanisation of socio-political discourse.
There was someone ranting about the price of drugs in healthcare the other day, on Reddit. For the UK.
He exploded when various people pointed out that NHS bulk buys and gets very good prices on most things. When it was pointed out that some of the reforms to bulk buying and using generics happened under Thatcher - he nearly got banned by the mods. From his "points" he had obviously absorbed a lot of content about US healthcare.
Giving the best possible case for the argument: you could perhaps argue that if the Jim Crow South can manage to appoint that many black people then a Scottish University drawing on the peoples of the British Empire ought to have at least managed reach that same low bar?
The racial make-up still doesn’t make any sense of course: the Scottish Universities should (by this argument) have been recruiting this fraction mostly from the Indian subcontinent, not people of African descent.
I don't understand that - are you saying that Scottish universities should have more ethnic diversity than the Scottish population, due to international students/fellows?
I see that recognition of a Palestinian state polls well, with majority support of every party apart from Reform, and even there it has substantial support.
Plurality rather than majority support from the Tories but yes a clear overall majority for it from uniparty voters and overall 45% for the UK recognising a Palestinian state, only 14% against. Reform again the exception. 37% of Reform voters oppose recognising a Palestinian state, just 15% in favour
Both Owen Jones and Nigel Farage are calling for the repeal of the Online Safety Act.
Is this good or bad for the Act’s probability of survival? I honestly can’t tell any more.
There are some issues that unite left and right?
They are both worshippers of Onan?
They're both Very Very Online.
For Very Online People, this is existential. It's saying that the ground on which you have built a chunk of your life is so toxic as to be uninhabitable by healthy people.
Understandable that some people are taking that badly.
(If you want the naughty bits without shame, whether it's seeing the contents of people's underwear or the ability to proclaim fruity opinions, just put your details in. If you're worried about the resulting shame, that's your conscience telling you something that web culture has falsely encouraged you to ignore.)
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
Their 'fellow Arabs' in the West Bank and Gaza who are in their eyes hand in glove with their *real* enemies - Iran and Russia?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
That’s why Palestine, i.e. the West Bank, needs to be a sovereign independent country recognised by the rest of the World. Then, if Israel invades, they are invading a sovereign country, and should be treated like Russia. Their choice.
I always wonder why all the Arab states hate Palestinians and never lift a finger to help them.
Have you read the history of the region? Start with Jordan.
Alternatively, watch the film Animal House
Boon: [Niedermyer is abusing Flounder in ROTC] Vicious mother, isn't he? Otter: He can't do that to our pledges! Boon: Only we can do that to our pledges.
They picked a hot woman who is well known because she has been in some big hit tv shows to advertise some clothes. There ain't anything deeper than that.
It's a hilarious story really. Dislike it for its lazy appeal to sexuality (as if that's never been done before), sure, but 'coded promotion of eugenics'? Get a grip. Yes, it quotes the line about genes passed down etc, but it's just a lame pun. She's not going to be an A-lister, despite attempts, but it almost feels like some people right and left want to make her an aspect of a culture war.
I do also hate the trend of 'user on X/tiktok/etc said Y' quotes. I guess it is just modern vox pop, but it means people saying stuff online itself becomes a story.
I just heard the most depressing prognosis of Britain's economic situation from one of the smartest businessmen I've ever met, who has recently become a friend
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
And does Britain's smartest businessman think Reform will improve matters?
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
I don't know his politics that deeply. We have only recently become friends. My guess would be centrist Tory Dad, or even Orange Book Lib Dem
Well it's an apolitical fact that we're in a precarious debt position. So are several other developed nations.
It's not just the debt. It's an entire bleak shopping list of dysfunction
Mainly the debt though. That's the objective factual issue. Other stuff is where people's politics intrude and impacts their judgement.
Starmer says UK will recognise Palestinian statehood in September unless Israel agrees ceasefire and two-state solution
Downing Street has just issued its readout of today’s cabinet meeting on Gaza.
Here is the key extract.
Turning to recognition, the prime minister said it had been this government’s longstanding position that recognition of a Palestinian state was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people and that we would recognise a Palestinian state as part of a process to peace and a two state solution.
He said that because of the increasingly intolerable situation in Gaza and the diminishing prospect of a peace process towards a two state solution, now was the right time to move this position forward. He said that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine in September, before UNGA, unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, reaches a ceasefire, makes clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and commits to a long-term peace process that delivers a two state solution. He reiterated that there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas and that our demands on Hamas remain, that they must release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, accept that they will play no role in the government of Gaza, and disarm.
No preconditions on Hamas surrendering then, capitulation by the government and rewarding them for October 7th. Disgusting.
I don't see recognition of Hamas as Govt, or for that matter Gaza included, but it is not clear.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
I’m no longer convinced that Gaza is saveable in any recognisable form. It’s just too damaged. I wonder if a compromise could be agreed whereby the West Bank is properly protected, by UN peacekeeping forces if necessary, with a commitment to absolutely no more Israeli settlers. Gazans could be encouraged to settle in the West Bank, or stay in their present territory as part of Israel, but again, protected from violence as long as they lay down their arms. It would need support of the wider world, including the Arab nations, who seem to be not supporting their fellow Arabs sufficiently.
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
Their 'fellow Arabs' in the West Bank and Gaza who are in their eyes hand in glove with their *real* enemies - Iran and Russia?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
That’s why Palestine, i.e. the West Bank, needs to be a sovereign independent country recognised by the rest of the World. Then, if Israel invades, they are invading a sovereign country, and should be treated like Russia. Their choice.
I always wonder why all the Arab states hate Palestinians and never lift a finger to help them.
Have you read the history of the region? Start with Jordan.
Alternatively, watch the film Animal House
Boon: [Niedermyer is abusing Flounder in ROTC] Vicious mother, isn't he? Otter: He can't do that to our pledges! Boon: Only we can do that to our pledges.
No but imagine it is just that they love killing each other on a regular basis and if stuck just fight among themselves.
Comments
https://x.com/bbcbreakfast/status/1950094301385437596?s=61
The report says the increasing diversity in the university’s population “does not benefit Black staff and students” yet Edinburgh prides itself on being a “global institution”. That means it should measure progress against the world’s demographics too. “While there is a dominant white racial majority in the UK, and especially in Scotland, the basis of comparison must not presume that small numbers of non-white racial and ethnic minorities in Scotland offer an appropriate baseline for comparison.
There are also four conditions that apply to Hamas: releasing all hostages, agreeing a ceasefire, withdrawing from the government of Gaza, and disarming. But the UK was calling for these anyway, and there seems little prospect of Hamas agreeing all of them.
This means that the most likely outcome seems to be that, by September, the UK will conclude its conditions have not been met, and it will then recognise the state of Palestine.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/jul/29/uk-politics-latest-news-cabinet-keir-starmer-nigel-farage-online-safety-act?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with:block-6888fba08f0805ff5de4ff58#block-6888fba08f0805ff5de4ff58
A few MPs, ones who were retiring anyway, might not make the switch. But the alternative for the Conservative party is destruction.
Now: can this scenario be avoided? Probably, but it requires (at the very least) for Kemi to step down.
1. Kids aren't all super tech savvy, and the "one kid who knows" rule doesn't mean that everyone can follow their instructions. That's particularly applicable to pre-teens. It's also not as common to restrict access to the internet on phones or tablets, but restricted access to apps is often the default for younger kids, and that does make things a touch less simple.
2. Not every kid wants to see adult material. An 11 year old who googles "feeling down", may want to see funny videos of dogs, rather than have some uncaring algorithm take their hand, and guide them gradually towards self-harm videos.
The 'fence' might be easy to climb, but younger kids are less likely to be able to climb over it. For kids who can climb over it, there will be plenty who won't, because they don't want to break the law , they fear the consequences of being caught by parents, or they simply don't want to do the wrong thing. For some kids, they don't want to go over the fence at all, so having it there makes it less likely they'll accidentally find themselves on the other side, in an adult world which they might struggle to ignore.
Suffice to say, wow we're fucked
P.S. Has anyone ever seen Topping and Benjamin Netanyahu in the same room?
For some reason.
Oh wait.
Not saying you/he is wrong, but gives us the gist please?
As for Gaza I think you've misunderstood what's happening. The whole idea is and has been for some years to make it so damaged it is uninhabitable because if the 2 million Palestinians leave it (for wherever) there will be an Israeli majority in the mandate so the West Bank can be annexed, even if it is given limited autonomy within the Israeli state (and by limited autonomy I mean on the level of West Yorkshire rather than Scotland or even Wales).
Netanyahu is accelerating this process because he's scared his collar is about to be felt, but it's been ongoing since at least 2007. Indeed, Sharon's withdrawal was aimed at tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank.
The West Bank is what they really want as it has fertile land, water, a strategic position between Israel and Jordan, the Biblical and tourist heartlands and perhaps above all means that Israel will be wider than ten miles wide.
The question we might want to ask is why did Hamas hand them this opportunity to do all these things under political and diplomatic cover on a plate? And that's a question to which we still do not have a real answer. It was obvious from the get-go that this would be how Netanyahu's government would play it and that should have been obvious to Hamas too.
(that's by way of a test of whether he is)
We are like a cartoon character over the cliff. The legs are whirring, the horrible drop is waiting
My friend explained that the "bankruptcy" might come in several different forms
From my perspective today is the first day that Team Starmer have got anything right regarding Gaza/Israel since the seventh of October 2023.
https://yougov.co.uk/international/articles/52679-britons-support-palestinian-statehood-by-45-to-14?utm_source=website_article&utm_medium=bluesky&utm_campaign=52679
I presume it is part of the Americanisation of socio-political discourse.
There was someone ranting about the price of drugs in healthcare the other day, on Reddit. For the UK.
He exploded when various people pointed out that NHS bulk buys and gets very good prices on most things. When it was pointed out that some of the reforms to bulk buying and using generics happened under Thatcher - he nearly got banned by the mods. From his "points" he had obviously absorbed a lot of content about US healthcare.
Is this good or bad for the Act’s probability of survival? I honestly can’t tell any more.
David Brindle
@DavidJ_Brindle
·
7h
Almost 1 in 4 #socialcare jobs now held by non-EU overseas workers,
@skillsforcare reports. Numbers doubled in just 2 years. Hard to see how sector will cope with visa clampdown.
https://x.com/DavidJ_Brindle/status/1950152659098378678
The racial make-up still doesn’t make any sense of course: the Scottish Universities should (by this argument) have been recruiting this fraction mostly from the Indian subcontinent, not people of African descent.
Vaguely on topic, with all the caveats about this being 2025 and the next election not likely before 2028 or even 2029 and the volume of water and the number of bridges said water has to pass under, there is a key point which is that we need to know in a fragmented electoral landscape what is happening at regional and even local level.
I'd argue even regional polling doesn't paint a complete picture but it's better than trying to extrapolate national polling.
Local council by elections offer some clues but they are often exceptional contests by their nature and the intervention of Independent candidates who would be unlikely to contest a GE muddies the waters somewhat.
The Act places great obligations on tech media companies including pb not to host illegal content or hurty words, and this has already caused some closures and is liable to upset the American government which is protective of free speech for tech bros who donated into Trump's campaign funds.
How to prove age, by the site directly or indirectly via third party apps. Issues around safety of uploaded docs from hackers, blackmailers and ID thieves. Have a look at what the porn sites say they have done.
Use of free or paid for VPNs to circumvent restrictions by making users appear to be in other countries. Most VPNs are controlled by only two companies, iirc. This would apply to social media as well as porn. Can't ban VPNs as needed for legitimate cybersecurity reasons when accessing remote servers as in WFH or for children, school-FH.
Tory measure enthusiastically adopted by Labour. No evidence ministers in either party have a bleeding clue. Is it noteworthy that Kemi was or is sceptical as she has a background in computing iirc?
Though all could change if the Tories squeeze Reform, Labour squeeze the Greens and Corbyn's new party does or does not take off
As to Gaza - I have no idea whether it will help or not.
Starmer clearly moving to recognise such a Palestinian state unless Israel moves to a ceasefire to stop any momentum for Corbyn
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society/survey-results/daily/2025/07/24/8b234/2
I actually had a delightful day with my older daughter. She’s quite goth and said she wanted to see one of the “magnificent seven” cemeteries of london (she’s already seen Highgate)
So we met at Borough market - insanely crowded and busy and fun - then got a train through Peckham to Nunhead. And Nunhead cemetery. That was as eerily overgrown and evocative as promised, then we came back to town
And this is where I had the biggest jolt of positive energy. Elephant and castle. Has anyone been recently????
It’s amazing. They’ve turned one of the worst toilets in london into a plush new neighbourhood of lovely apartment blocks and elegant squares and swish new gardens. It looks like a rich new burb in, say, Melbourne or Vancouver. And this is elephant and bleeding castle. What happened to the barrier blocks and smack dealers?!?
It all felt very affluent and agreeable and multiracial in a GOOD way. London at its best
So I actually hied home feeling quite upbeat about London and the UK. And then my friend gave me his brutal diagnosis of Britain’s future
Oh well. Nice while it lasted
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/29/american-eagle-sydney-sweeney-jeans-ad
They picked a hot woman who is well known because she has been in some big hit tv shows to advertise some clothes. There ain't anything deeper than that.
The YouGov regional subsamples are at least weighted so I normally keep half an eye on them 'for very broad trends only'
Id say very broadly actual votes being cast reflect the poll order we currently see with the government being punished harder as you'd expect,and that very broadly speaking there is no sign of
1) a Tory recovery outside a few isolated locales (Rushcliffe went very well for them in May for example)
2) the LD coalition of votes that won them 72 seats fracturing yet
3) Labour being a dead cert anywhere
4) no go Reform areas
Buy lunch at the White Cross Market, then find a bench in the Fields.
The HAC grounds is also interesting, if open.
For Very Online People, this is existential. It's saying that the ground on which you have built a chunk of your life is so toxic as to be uninhabitable by healthy people.
Understandable that some people are taking that badly.
(If you want the naughty bits without shame, whether it's seeing the contents of people's underwear or the ability to proclaim fruity opinions, just put your details in. If you're worried about the resulting shame, that's your conscience telling you something that web culture has falsely encouraged you to ignore.)
Alternatively, watch the film Animal House
Boon: [Niedermyer is abusing Flounder in ROTC] Vicious mother, isn't he?
Otter: He can't do that to our pledges!
Boon: Only we can do that to our pledges.
BBC News - IMF upgrades global growth forecast as tariffs ease
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn84gg2y5kpo
I do also hate the trend of 'user on X/tiktok/etc said Y' quotes. I guess it is just modern vox pop, but it means people saying stuff online itself becomes a story.
Also, is Australia not defined as developed economy? The article says behind US and Canada...but...
Australia's forecast economic growth has been upgraded by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to 1.8 per cent in 2025 and 2.2 per cent in 2026.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-30/imf-says-global-economy-showing-resilience-against-tariffs/105588444