The messaging was poor to begin with and when the PM is so unpopular you have a toxic combination.
The policy will either get shelved or narrowed to be just a right to work ID and only mandatory for those wanting to work.
That poll is a death warrant for Starmer’s career. If a popular policy craters on presentation, simply because the abhorred PM announces it, then a government is effectively paralysed. It cannot announce anything
I’ve been saying it for months and now we have proof. People don’t just disregard Starmer they loathe him. He provokes allergic reactions and general nausea. That’s why he has the worst polling in history. No one trusts him and everyone presumes everything he does is designed to hurt British people and help random Arabs on boats
Rational or not, there is it. At this point Labour has no choice but to junk him
Do Labour have anybody that is better regarded - to the point where they could have got support for ID cards?
Nope.
Not only was Labour's electoral support a mile wide but an inch deep, their talent pool was an inch wide and an inch deep.
Good point
Still, Labour have no choice. Starmer has to quit because he can no longer govern. Anything he announces turns to ashes
They’d be better off with an inane person like Cooper. At least she doesn’t immediately make you want to puke as you cringe
The Starmer anti-Midas touch raises another issue. Is it not possible his attacks on Farage and Reform will - for this reason - actually boost Farage and Reform?
Starmer is weakest in November - when he supports the bucket of cold sick that is Reeve's Budget.
If the bond markets don't like it, they may both have to go.
Not sure who steps in though to regain the confidence of the markets.
The messaging was poor to begin with and when the PM is so unpopular you have a toxic combination.
The policy will either get shelved or narrowed to be just a right to work ID and only mandatory for those wanting to work.
That poll is a death warrant for Starmer’s career. If a popular policy craters on presentation, simply because the abhorred PM announces it, then a government is effectively paralysed. It cannot announce anything
I’ve been saying it for months and now we have proof. People don’t just disregard Starmer they loathe him. He provokes allergic reactions and general nausea. That’s why he has the worst polling in history. No one trusts him and everyone presumes everything he does is designed to hurt British people and help random Arabs on boats
Rational or not, there is it. At this point Labour has no choice but to junk him
Do Labour have anybody that is better regarded - to the point where they could have got support for ID cards?
Nope.
Not only was Labour's electoral support a mile wide but an inch deep, their talent pool was an inch wide and an inch deep.
Good point
Still, Labour have no choice. Starmer has to quit because he can no longer govern. Anything he announces turns to ashes
They’d be better off with an inane person like Cooper. At least she doesn’t immediately make you want to puke as you cringe
The Starmer anti-Midas touch raises another issue. Is it not possible his attacks on Farage and Reform will - for this reason - actually boost Farage and Reform?
There is no alternative to Starmer though and if he doesn't want to resign there's no feasible way to remove him as a sitting PM. Labour don't have the same lax rules in dethroning a leader like the Tories. Starmer is here until he decides he's had enough or voters decide they've had enough.
That’s true theoretically but not in actuality. If - for instance - the majority of his Cabinet go to him and express no confidence or threaten to resign, if he continues, then a PM will quit
Or a majority of his MPs and so on
But why would they do that? They all receive ministerial salaries etc... and there's no guarantee they would get that under a new leader without a very well organised an planned coup by someone already in parliament. There is no stalking horse candidate that can simply takeover and keep the plates spinning and keep the likes of Reeves and Miliband in their fancy cars on £180k salaries.
I think you're seriously underestimating how much inertia there is to do these things. In the Tories a few backbenchers can club together and force a vote, that simply isn't possible for Labour MPs.
News on PPE Medpro front: almost, but not quite, all bawbees have to be repaid.
'A COMPANY linked to Michelle Mone has been told it must repay the UK Government nearly £122 million back after it breached a contract to supply surgical gowns during the pandemic.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) sued PPE Medpro, saying the company had provided 25m “faulty” gowns that were not sterile.
Lawyers for the Government told a trial earlier this year that it was entitled to recover the £121m cost of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691.'
PPE MedPro's last accounts, to July 2025 (quite quick with the filing there - oh, now I see why) reports only net assets of some £666k (six hundred and sixty six thousand pounds).
They have included a contigent liability note, but it is clear the company has no ability to repay this. Therefore, corporate lawyers?... unless the directors or shareholders can be held personally liable (highly unlikely, that's the whole point of limited liability) there is no chance of getting more than a token payment from this company.
The woman took the profits, she should stand the losses
You'd presumably be arguing the dividends from the company in previous years are now illegal, but good luck with that. I find it odd that this company has to repay £122m, but it has filed unaudited small company accounts every year for the last four years. That means it's unlikely to have ever 'earned' the £122m claimed from the contract. I know the small company rules are 'two out of three' so I suppose it's possible.... just odd. Was the £122m 'earned' in the year to 5th April 2021 perhaps, immediately declared as a dividend so the net assets are kept low.
It seems to me, this simple accountant, that the accounts for the last four years are works of fiction as well. You should only recognise revenue when its earned, not received; and if they received £122m for this PPE but never delivered it, it should've sat on the balance sheet as deferred income. Which it obviously hasn't.
But let's be honest, I'm being too charitable. The accounts filed for all of the last four years are complete bollocks. PPE MedPro simply got the cash, passed it same day to the shareholders/other spongers and never fulfilled their end of the deal. It might even be said.... they never intended to.
The messaging was poor to begin with and when the PM is so unpopular you have a toxic combination.
The policy will either get shelved or narrowed to be just a right to work ID and only mandatory for those wanting to work.
That poll is a death warrant for Starmer’s career. If a popular policy craters on presentation, simply because the abhorred PM announces it, then a government is effectively paralysed. It cannot announce anything
I’ve been saying it for months and now we have proof. People don’t just disregard Starmer they loathe him. He provokes allergic reactions and general nausea. That’s why he has the worst polling in history. No one trusts him and everyone presumes everything he does is designed to hurt British people and help random Arabs on boats
Rational or not, there is it. At this point Labour has no choice but to junk him
It was only ever popular superficially.
Explain to those with knee-jerk support the dangers, unintended consequences, totalitarian nature, cost, ineffectiveness against its supposed purpose etc etc and the 'support' melts away into opposition very quickly.
The messaging was poor to begin with and when the PM is so unpopular you have a toxic combination.
The policy will either get shelved or narrowed to be just a right to work ID and only mandatory for those wanting to work.
That poll is a death warrant for Starmer’s career. If a popular policy craters on presentation, simply because the abhorred PM announces it, then a government is effectively paralysed. It cannot announce anything
I’ve been saying it for months and now we have proof. People don’t just disregard Starmer they loathe him. He provokes allergic reactions and general nausea. That’s why he has the worst polling in history. No one trusts him and everyone presumes everything he does is designed to hurt British people and help random Arabs on boats
Rational or not, there is it. At this point Labour has no choice but to junk him
Do Labour have anybody that is better regarded - to the point where they could have got support for ID cards?
Nope.
Not only was Labour's electoral support a mile wide but an inch deep, their talent pool was an inch wide and an inch deep.
Good point
Still, Labour have no choice. Starmer has to quit because he can no longer govern. Anything he announces turns to ashes
They’d be better off with an inane person like Cooper. At least she doesn’t immediately make you want to puke as you cringe
The Starmer anti-Midas touch raises another issue. Is it not possible his attacks on Farage and Reform will - for this reason - actually boost Farage and Reform?
There is no alternative to Starmer though and if he doesn't want to resign there's no feasible way to remove him as a sitting PM. Labour don't have the same lax rules in dethroning a leader like the Tories. Starmer is here until he decides he's had enough or voters decide they've had enough.
That’s true theoretically but not in actuality. If - for instance - the majority of his Cabinet go to him and express no confidence or threaten to resign, if he continues, then a PM will quit
Or a majority of his MPs and so on
But why would they do that? They all receive ministerial salaries etc... and there's no guarantee they would get that under a new leader without a very well organised an planned coup by someone already in parliament. There is no stalking horse candidate that can simply takeover and keep the plates spinning and keep the likes of Reeves and Miliband in their fancy cars on £180k salaries.
I think you're seriously underestimating how much inertia there is to do these things. In the Tories a few backbenchers can club together and force a vote, that simply isn't possible for Labour MPs.
All very reasonable. And yet - Starmer has to go. Irresistible force etc
This is not a partisan point. I’d quite like him to stay as he is personally destroying Labour as Truss did for the Tories - but maybe worse
However I don’t believe his position is sustainable ergo it won’t be sustained
News on PPE Medpro front: almost, but not quite, all bawbees have to be repaid.
'A COMPANY linked to Michelle Mone has been told it must repay the UK Government nearly £122 million back after it breached a contract to supply surgical gowns during the pandemic.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) sued PPE Medpro, saying the company had provided 25m “faulty” gowns that were not sterile.
Lawyers for the Government told a trial earlier this year that it was entitled to recover the £121m cost of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691.'
PPE MedPro's last accounts, to July 2025 (quite quick with the filing there - oh, now I see why) reports only net assets of some £666k (six hundred and sixty six thousand pounds).
They have included a contigent liability note, but it is clear the company has no ability to repay this. Therefore, corporate lawyers?... unless the directors or shareholders can be held personally liable (highly unlikely, that's the whole point of limited liability) there is no chance of getting more than a token payment from this company.
There are a number of potential options. If the company has been trading whilst insolvent the directors can become personally liable. Ditto if there has been "wrongful trading" which might be a better option. If the liability has been incurred by the company as a result of breaches of fiduciary duty by a director (eg the director knew that the goods supplied were not conform but proceeded anyway) then the liquidator may have a claim for the liabilities incurred. There may be some insurance.
None of these are straightforward (except insurance) but given the sums and the political profile I think the government may well be minded to pursue one or more of them.
Coming soon to GBNews as the victims here...
Related to this, the toxic scrote evaded paying compensation and legal fees to the teenager he repeatedly harassed by getting divorced, transferring all the assets to his "ex" and declaring bankruptcy. What happens about the legal fees? Presumably the plaintiff doesn't become liable for the legal fees despite winning but not recovering both compensation and costs Do the toxic scrote's legal team get paid? Is there a mutual "fairplay" arrangement where any money on account would be turned over to the plaintiff's legal team?
If not this does seem to introduce an incentive to operate in bad faith.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
News on PPE Medpro front: almost, but not quite, all bawbees have to be repaid.
'A COMPANY linked to Michelle Mone has been told it must repay the UK Government nearly £122 million back after it breached a contract to supply surgical gowns during the pandemic.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) sued PPE Medpro, saying the company had provided 25m “faulty” gowns that were not sterile.
Lawyers for the Government told a trial earlier this year that it was entitled to recover the £121m cost of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691.'
PPE MedPro's last accounts, to July 2025 (quite quick with the filing there - oh, now I see why) reports only net assets of some £666k (six hundred and sixty six thousand pounds).
They have included a contigent liability note, but it is clear the company has no ability to repay this. Therefore, corporate lawyers?... unless the directors or shareholders can be held personally liable (highly unlikely, that's the whole point of limited liability) there is no chance of getting more than a token payment from this company.
The woman took the profits, she should stand the losses
You'd presumably be arguing the dividends from the company in previous years are now illegal, but good luck with that. I find it odd that this company has to repay £122m, but it has filed unaudited small company accounts every year for the last four years. That means it's unlikely to have ever 'earned' the £122m claimed from the contract. I know the small company rules are 'two out of three' so I suppose it's possible.... just odd. Was the £122m 'earned' in the year to 5th April 2021 perhaps, immediately declared as a dividend so the net assets are kept low.
It seems to me, this simple accountant, that the accounts for the last four years are works of fiction as well. You should only recognise revenue when its earned, not received; and if they received £122m for this PPE but never delivered it, it should've sat on the balance sheet as deferred income. Which it obviously hasn't.
But let's be honest, I'm being too charitable. The accounts filed for all of the last four years are complete bollocks. PPE MedPro simply got the cash, passed it same day to the shareholders/other spongers and never fulfilled their end of the deal. It might even be said.... they never intended to.
Did they not deliver the products but they were non-compliant?
The UK govt could learn some lessons from Trump here, seize their assets and revoke their citizenship under an executive order.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
The messaging was poor to begin with and when the PM is so unpopular you have a toxic combination.
The policy will either get shelved or narrowed to be just a right to work ID and only mandatory for those wanting to work.
That poll is a death warrant for Starmer’s career. If a popular policy craters on presentation, simply because the abhorred PM announces it, then a government is effectively paralysed. It cannot announce anything
I’ve been saying it for months and now we have proof. People don’t just disregard Starmer they loathe him. He provokes allergic reactions and general nausea. That’s why he has the worst polling in history. No one trusts him and everyone presumes everything he does is designed to hurt British people and help random Arabs on boats
Rational or not, there is it. At this point Labour has no choice but to junk him
Do Labour have anybody that is better regarded - to the point where they could have got support for ID cards?
Nope.
Not only was Labour's electoral support a mile wide but an inch deep, their talent pool was an inch wide and an inch deep.
Good point
Still, Labour have no choice. Starmer has to quit because he can no longer govern. Anything he announces turns to ashes
They’d be better off with an inane person like Cooper. At least she doesn’t immediately make you want to puke as you cringe
The Starmer anti-Midas touch raises another issue. Is it not possible his attacks on Farage and Reform will - for this reason - actually boost Farage and Reform?
Re the latter paragraph - yes, incredibly plausible. If you’re setting your government up as the anti-Farage, then it is easier for your opposition to coalesce around that.
I have been saying for a while now that I think we’re far from Peak Reform and I stand by that view.
The messaging was poor to begin with and when the PM is so unpopular you have a toxic combination.
The policy will either get shelved or narrowed to be just a right to work ID and only mandatory for those wanting to work.
That poll is a death warrant for Starmer’s career. If a popular policy craters on presentation, simply because the abhorred PM announces it, then a government is effectively paralysed. It cannot announce anything
I’ve been saying it for months and now we have proof. People don’t just disregard Starmer they loathe him. He provokes allergic reactions and general nausea. That’s why he has the worst polling in history. No one trusts him and everyone presumes everything he does is designed to hurt British people and help random Arabs on boats
Rational or not, there is it. At this point Labour has no choice but to junk him
Do Labour have anybody that is better regarded - to the point where they could have got support for ID cards?
Nope.
Not only was Labour's electoral support a mile wide but an inch deep, their talent pool was an inch wide and an inch deep.
Good point
Still, Labour have no choice. Starmer has to quit because he can no longer govern. Anything he announces turns to ashes
They’d be better off with an inane person like Cooper. At least she doesn’t immediately make you want to puke as you cringe
The Starmer anti-Midas touch raises another issue. Is it not possible his attacks on Farage and Reform will - for this reason - actually boost Farage and Reform?
There is no alternative to Starmer though and if he doesn't want to resign there's no feasible way to remove him as a sitting PM. Labour don't have the same lax rules in dethroning a leader like the Tories. Starmer is here until he decides he's had enough or voters decide they've had enough.
That’s true theoretically but not in actuality. If - for instance - the majority of his Cabinet go to him and express no confidence or threaten to resign, if he continues, then a PM will quit
Or a majority of his MPs and so on
But why would they do that? They all receive ministerial salaries etc... and there's no guarantee they would get that under a new leader without a very well organised an planned coup by someone already in parliament. There is no stalking horse candidate that can simply takeover and keep the plates spinning and keep the likes of Reeves and Miliband in their fancy cars on £180k salaries.
I think you're seriously underestimating how much inertia there is to do these things. In the Tories a few backbenchers can club together and force a vote, that simply isn't possible for Labour MPs.
All very reasonable. And yet - Starmer has to go. Irresistible force etc
This is not a partisan point. I’d quite like him to stay as he is personally destroying Labour as Truss did for the Tories - but maybe worse
However I don’t believe his position is sustainable ergo it won’t be sustained
I just don't see it, if Labour are lucky they'll get him to resign in early 2028 and then with a new leader try for a late summer election and hope that England win the Euros at Wembley and Team GB have a banner Olympics. I think Starmer is simply too arrogant to realise how shit he is at the job. He's lived a life of being a privileged public sector worker surrounded by yes men, that hasn't changed at all and even now you can tell from his speeches he feels hard done by, hence hitting out at Reform/Nige rather than looking at what it is he and Labour have fucked up.
No, Labour are stuck with him until he decides to resign or voters have had enough. 2028 is probably the earliest they can realistically remove him with the kind of cabinet resignations you're imagining.
That's also a demonstration of the incredibly fickle nature of public opinion.
...in June, 53% of voters surveyed said they were in favour of digital ID cards for all Britons, while 19% were opposed...
...Just 31% of people surveyed after Starmer’s announcement over the weekend said they were supportive of the scheme, with 45% saying they were opposed. Of those, 32% said they were strongly opposed...
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
Ukraine sent 230 drones into Russia - including 6 HIMARS - expecting them all to be taken down. Russia was cheering its success - unawre they were decoys to allow a further 6 HIMARS missiles through to take out the Belgorod thermal power station. A brilliant operation by the Ukrainians that blinded the Russians - and causing the railways to be shut down and crash their supply lines.
Did no-one at war school study previous wars (e.g. Bomber Command vs Germany)?
Apparently not.
There was even war games, after the war, where Bomber Command re-ran raids, and watched them from the German control rooms, to verify their deception tactics.
By the end of the war, about 25% of the effort of each mass raid went into deception/decoy raids on other targets.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
Well, quite. The only difficult part for the man in the street is the Semtex and they had plenty of that.
This shows what can be achieved with brave and principled political leadership. I'm so glad to live in a city where the mayor is willing to prioritize children's health over the whining of the motorist lobby. Congrats to Sadiq.
That's also a demonstration of the incredibly fickle nature of public opinion.
...in June, 53% of voters surveyed said they were in favour of digital ID cards for all Britons, while 19% were opposed...
...Just 31% of people surveyed after Starmer’s announcement over the weekend said they were supportive of the scheme, with 45% saying they were opposed. Of those, 32% said they were strongly opposed...
That seems to me an entirely logical approach. After all, Starmer thinking its a good idea would make almost anyone have doubts.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
Cover strategic infrastructure in huge nets?
Both sides have done that, and it has limited utility against the most basic of drones, but it's not really enough.
Interceptor drones seem more promising, but you'd still need vast numbers of them and to be able to spot incoming drones.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
That’s why I referred specifically to Infantry roles - still vital in war as we see in Ukraine. Am not agreeing with Hegseth’s mindset but was replying to the post regarding running limiting female numbers in the military.
True, but the war in Ukraine is very specific to Ukraine: it's wet, muddy, no air superiority for either side, and no real naval component. If the US armed forces were to fully intervene in Ukraine, it would be over very quickly. I don't know if a war waged by the US would be fought in such a way to disqualify female warfighters, even in the Army. But happy to be contradicted.
This shows what can be achieved with brave and principled political leadership. I'm so glad to live in a city where the mayor is willing to prioritize children's health over the whining of the motorist lobby. Congrats to Sadiq.
Its an all too rare good news story. I suspect it has been driven more by the introduction of electric buses and other similar vehicles than ULEZ itself but hey, let's not knock it.
A company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone breached a £122m government contract by supplying unsterile personal protective equipment during the Covid pandemic, a judge rules
Whoops.
It’s one thing to take a big pile of money to supply stuff that’s scarce during an emergency, but you’d better made sure that you do actually supply what’s been paid for.
No issues with those who were paid up front but supplied substandard PPE being chased for the money.
How many dodgy companies have anything like their liability left in the pot? PPE Medpro had £600,000 available yesterday before they went into administration. Limited liability means Doug and Michie keep the super yacht. Starmer's Government lose almost all of the £122m plus the £8m penalty surcharge.
A company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone breached a £122m government contract by supplying unsterile personal protective equipment during the Covid pandemic, a judge rules
Whoops.
It’s one thing to take a big pile of money to supply stuff that’s scarce during an emergency, but you’d better made sure that you do actually supply what’s been paid for.
No issues with those who were paid up front but supplied substandard PPE being chased for the money.
How many dodgy companies have anything like their liability left in the pot? PPE Medpro had £600,000 available yesterday before they went into administration. Limited liability means Doug and Michie keep the super yacht. Starmer's Government lose almost all of the £122m plus the £8m penalty surcharge.
Can directors not be chased in particularly egregious cases?
I assume they won't get far with whatever Chinese supplier sent them the rubbish in the first place.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
Surely if an Apache is close enough to get quickly there then it's just another expensive target on the list?
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
The Ukrainians have had success in using helicopters to shoot down Shahed drones. The advantage with the jets is that a relatively small number can cover a wider area.
A company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone breached a £122m government contract by supplying unsterile personal protective equipment during the Covid pandemic, a judge rules
Whoops.
It’s one thing to take a big pile of money to supply stuff that’s scarce during an emergency, but you’d better made sure that you do actually supply what’s been paid for.
No issues with those who were paid up front but supplied substandard PPE being chased for the money.
How many dodgy companies have anything like their liability left in the pot? PPE Medpro had £600,000 available yesterday before they went into administration. Limited liability means Doug and Michie keep the super yacht. Starmer's Government lose almost all of the £122m plus the £8m penalty surcharge.
Can directors not be chased in particularly egregious cases?
I assume they won't get far with whatever Chinese supplier sent them the rubbish in the first place.
If there are a couple of sprats to be thrown to the sharks that would be Doug and Michie.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
A little birdie tells me that holographic radar works rather well against drones. A tech developed in Cambridge by a bunch of brilliant guys and gals. Now part of Thales.
Apologies for mad posting. On a bus at Naples airport
You don't normally apologise for mad posting. I once spent two hours standing on an airport bus at Naples Airport during a wildcat strike. When I got on the bus they weren't on strike, and then they were. It's a rite of passage.
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
Apologies for mad posting. On a bus at Naples airport
You don't normally apologise for mad posting. I once spent two hours standing on an airport bus at Naples Airport during a wildcat strike. When I got on the bus they weren't on strike, and then they were. It's a rite of passage.
That sounds like the set up to a horror movie. There's that sketch in The Day Today where commuters on a train to London go feral.
This shows what can be achieved with brave and principled political leadership. I'm so glad to live in a city where the mayor is willing to prioritize children's health over the whining of the motorist lobby. Congrats to Sadiq.
Its an all too rare good news story. I suspect it has been driven more by the introduction of electric buses and other similar vehicles than ULEZ itself but hey, let's not knock it.
Indeed - public transport in London is ever more electric.
the original reason for the “Boris Bus” was that a hybrid power train was required to reduce particulates and SO2 emissions.
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
If the BBC jump onto the Mail's assertion that Starmer's speech effectively put a hit out on Nigel,the story might get worse rather than better. Farage absolutely stole the narrative yesterday. What he said was bollocks, but bollocks sells newspapers.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
The Ukrainians have had success in using helicopters to shoot down Shahed drones. The advantage with the jets is that a relatively small number can cover a wider area.
As mentioned the other day, a cheap(ish) option is a guidance kit added to 70mm unguided rockets.
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
If the BBC jump onto the Mail's assertion that Starmer's speech effectively put a hit out on Nigel,the story might get worse rather than better. Farage absolutely stole the narrative yesterday. What he said was bollocks, but bollocks sells newspapers.
Labour need to make a lot more of the fact that it was his own teacher who originally raised his far-right schoolday issues, not them.
Some of his contemporaries raised them well before Labour, too, and those accounts have been publicised for years.
Apologies for mad posting. On a bus at Naples airport
You don't normally apologise for mad posting. I once spent two hours standing on an airport bus at Naples Airport during a wildcat strike. When I got on the bus they weren't on strike, and then they were. It's a rite of passage.
That sounds like the set up to a horror movie. There's that sketch in The Day Today where commuters on a train to London go feral.
I remember it was like the Black Hole of Calcutta. The sun beating down on a glass bus was not ideal. Although to be fair to the driver, when he abandoned the bus he left it in the shade of the airport building.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
A little birdie tells me that holographic radar works rather well against drones. A tech developed in Cambridge by a bunch of brilliant guys and gals. Now part of Thales.
News on PPE Medpro front: almost, but not quite, all bawbees have to be repaid.
'A COMPANY linked to Michelle Mone has been told it must repay the UK Government nearly £122 million back after it breached a contract to supply surgical gowns during the pandemic.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) sued PPE Medpro, saying the company had provided 25m “faulty” gowns that were not sterile.
Lawyers for the Government told a trial earlier this year that it was entitled to recover the £121m cost of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691.'
PPE MedPro's last accounts, to July 2025 (quite quick with the filing there - oh, now I see why) reports only net assets of some £666k (six hundred and sixty six thousand pounds).
They have included a contigent liability note, but it is clear the company has no ability to repay this. Therefore, corporate lawyers?... unless the directors or shareholders can be held personally liable (highly unlikely, that's the whole point of limited liability) there is no chance of getting more than a token payment from this company.
The woman took the profits, she should stand the losses
You'd presumably be arguing the dividends from the company in previous years are now illegal, but good luck with that. I find it odd that this company has to repay £122m, but it has filed unaudited small company accounts every year for the last four years. That means it's unlikely to have ever 'earned' the £122m claimed from the contract. I know the small company rules are 'two out of three' so I suppose it's possible.... just odd. Was the £122m 'earned' in the year to 5th April 2021 perhaps, immediately declared as a dividend so the net assets are kept low.
It seems to me, this simple accountant, that the accounts for the last four years are works of fiction as well. You should only recognise revenue when its earned, not received; and if they received £122m for this PPE but never delivered it, it should've sat on the balance sheet as deferred income. Which it obviously hasn't.
But let's be honest, I'm being too charitable. The accounts filed for all of the last four years are complete bollocks. PPE MedPro simply got the cash, passed it same day to the shareholders/other spongers and never fulfilled their end of the deal. It might even be said.... they never intended to.
Did they not deliver the products but they were non-compliant?
The UK govt could learn some lessons from Trump here, seize their assets and revoke their citizenship under an executive order.
So their argument would have been (and I know I'm not a lawyer, nor read the case) is that the revenue was earned as the goods were delivered. So it's revenue and immediately distributable as dividends. Obviously, the governments (correct) argument is that as they were substandard, the contract wasn't fulfilled and the goods should be returned for cash.
But of course, this is all four years too late now isn't it?
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
Yes, for the prop driven Shahed type stuff (Ukraine currently knocks down about half of those with slower and less well equipped helos, so it's absolutely a good idea). Not much use against terrorist style attacks.
I think we have about 50, in total, so not a load, and they can't be everywhere.
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
If the BBC jump onto the Mail's assertion that Starmer's speech effectively put a hit out on Nigel,the story might get worse rather than better. Farage absolutely stole the narrative yesterday. What he said was bollocks, but bollocks sells newspapers.
Labour need to make a lot more of the fact that it was his own teacher who originally raised his far-right schoolday issues, not them.
His contemporaries also raised them before Labour, too.
It's the usual sh*te Labour Comms. They captured a great narrative and let Farage hijack it with bullshine.
That's also a demonstration of the incredibly fickle nature of public opinion.
...in June, 53% of voters surveyed said they were in favour of digital ID cards for all Britons, while 19% were opposed...
...Just 31% of people surveyed after Starmer’s announcement over the weekend said they were supportive of the scheme, with 45% saying they were opposed. Of those, 32% said they were strongly opposed...
The British electorate is Andy Pipkin personified.
"Do you really want that?"
"Yeah."
"Are you sure? Only last time, you didn't like it."
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
Yes, for the prop driven Shahed type stuff (Ukraine currently knocks down about half of those with slower and less well equipped helos, so it's absolutely a good idea). Not much use against terrorist style attacks.
I think we have about 50, in total, so not a load, and they can't be everywhere.
They also cost £34m each to buy, plus whatever else for pilots, maintenance technicians, ammunition, spare parts, etc.
Estimates vary for the cost of the Shahed type drones Russia uses in large numbers against Ukraine, but Russia might get as many as 2,000 for the cost of one Apache helicopter.
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
The drone threat to the rest of Europe appears rather more serious than a couple of incursions.
NEW (Germany): Authorities say the drone incidents over Schleswig-Holstein were more serious than first thought. Swarms of drones deliberately flew over critical infrastructure including the Thyssenkrupp naval shipyard in Kiel, Kiel University Hospital, a power plant, the Kiel State Parliament, and the Heide refinery that supplies Hamburg Airport with kerosene.. https://x.com/InsiderGeo/status/1973312973155291319
I don't think anyone outside of Ukraine yet has even a partial capacity to prevent a determined attack.
I'm surprised that a western country hasn't suffered a spectacular terrorist attack using drones. Can you imagine what the IRA would have done with drone technology?
It's a matter of time, I think. Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets. There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
Or just use a ship, of course, as with the Denmark incident.
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
British military radar is probably of little use in a dense urban environment.
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
To save me looking it up, can helicopters keep up with most drones? It occurred to me that we have a load of Apaches kicking around, and Europe has a lot of attack helicopters all together, that are surely cheaper than jets.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
The Ukrainians have had success in using helicopters to shoot down Shahed drones. The advantage with the jets is that a relatively small number can cover a wider area.
As mentioned the other day, a cheap(ish) option is a guidance kit added to 70mm unguided rockets.
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
I remember in the excellent Chicken Hawk the author lamented that the army taught them to fly helicopters exactly the same way- with lots of running and marching. It's a mindset as old as time for the army.
Stamer is seemingly the most politically inept PM in living memory, which given some of the recent incumbents takes some doing. I genuinely think he's incapable of doing the job, he can't lead, he can't think ahead and spot blindingly obvious problems, and he's so bloody boring.
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
If the BBC jump onto the Mail's assertion that Starmer's speech effectively put a hit out on Nigel,the story might get worse rather than better. Farage absolutely stole the narrative yesterday. What he said was bollocks, but bollocks sells newspapers.
Labour need to make a lot more of the fact that it was his own teacher who originally raised his far-right schoolday issues, not them.
His contemporaries also raised them before Labour, too.
It's the usual sh*te Labour Comms. They captured a great narrative and let Farage hijack it with bullshine.
Would YOU want to be held to comments you made when you were 13 years old. What the heck, back then I couldn't even solve second order differential equations !
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
If the BBC jump onto the Mail's assertion that Starmer's speech effectively put a hit out on Nigel,the story might get worse rather than better. Farage absolutely stole the narrative yesterday. What he said was bollocks, but bollocks sells newspapers.
Labour need to make a lot more of the fact that it was his own teacher who originally raised his far-right schoolday issues, not them.
His contemporaries also raised them before Labour, too.
It's the usual sh*te Labour Comms. They captured a great narrative and let Farage hijack it with bullshine.
Has the Head of Comms left her post yet? Not exactly encouraging if so. If not - why not?
Stamer is seemingly the most politically inept PM in living memory, which given some of the recent incumbents takes some doing. I genuinely think he's incapable of doing the job, he can't lead, he can't think ahead and spot blindingly obvious problems, and he's so bloody boring.
I wonder how many people would swap out Starmer/Reeves with Sunak/Hunt right now...
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
Standards must be maintained. Tho I doubt the higher level contractors have to jump through any such hoops.
News on PPE Medpro front: almost, but not quite, all bawbees have to be repaid.
'A COMPANY linked to Michelle Mone has been told it must repay the UK Government nearly £122 million back after it breached a contract to supply surgical gowns during the pandemic.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) sued PPE Medpro, saying the company had provided 25m “faulty” gowns that were not sterile.
Lawyers for the Government told a trial earlier this year that it was entitled to recover the £121m cost of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691.'
PPE MedPro's last accounts, to July 2025 (quite quick with the filing there - oh, now I see why) reports only net assets of some £666k (six hundred and sixty six thousand pounds).
They have included a contigent liability note, but it is clear the company has no ability to repay this. Therefore, corporate lawyers?... unless the directors or shareholders can be held personally liable (highly unlikely, that's the whole point of limited liability) there is no chance of getting more than a token payment from this company.
The woman took the profits, she should stand the losses
You'd presumably be arguing the dividends from the company in previous years are now illegal, but good luck with that. I find it odd that this company has to repay £122m, but it has filed unaudited small company accounts every year for the last four years. That means it's unlikely to have ever 'earned' the £122m claimed from the contract. I know the small company rules are 'two out of three' so I suppose it's possible.... just odd. Was the £122m 'earned' in the year to 5th April 2021 perhaps, immediately declared as a dividend so the net assets are kept low.
It seems to me, this simple accountant, that the accounts for the last four years are works of fiction as well. You should only recognise revenue when its earned, not received; and if they received £122m for this PPE but never delivered it, it should've sat on the balance sheet as deferred income. Which it obviously hasn't.
But let's be honest, I'm being too charitable. The accounts filed for all of the last four years are complete bollocks. PPE MedPro simply got the cash, passed it same day to the shareholders/other spongers and never fulfilled their end of the deal. It might even be said.... they never intended to.
Did they not deliver the products but they were non-compliant?
The UK govt could learn some lessons from Trump here, seize their assets and revoke their citizenship under an executive order.
So their argument would have been (and I know I'm not a lawyer, nor read the case) is that the revenue was earned as the goods were delivered. So it's revenue and immediately distributable as dividends. Obviously, the governments (correct) argument is that as they were substandard, the contract wasn't fulfilled and the goods should be returned for cash.
But of course, this is all four years too late now isn't it?
Presumably at some point this crosses from "regrettable mistake" to "deliberate fraud"
FFS there are more effective remedies for reimbursement buying off ebay with paypal
Apologies for mad posting. On a bus at Naples airport
You don't normally apologise for mad posting. I once spent two hours standing on an airport bus at Naples Airport during a wildcat strike. When I got on the bus they weren't on strike, and then they were. It's a rite of passage.
Were you contractually reqired to stay on it?
I remember many years ago that the people of Florence would never pay the bus fare. If the inspector got on, they would get off and wait for the next bus.
So the bus company doubled the fares that nobody was paying. What happened? The good people of Florence rioted and burned down the buses...
Another scrote who has difficulty spelling his own name. Pessimistically, I can see being ripped off in cryptoscams just increasing his supporters rage at the world.
A company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone breached a £122m government contract by supplying unsterile personal protective equipment during the Covid pandemic, a judge rules
Whoops.
It’s one thing to take a big pile of money to supply stuff that’s scarce during an emergency, but you’d better made sure that you do actually supply what’s been paid for.
No issues with those who were paid up front but supplied substandard PPE being chased for the money.
How many dodgy companies have anything like their liability left in the pot? PPE Medpro had £600,000 available yesterday before they went into administration. Limited liability means Doug and Michie keep the super yacht. Starmer's Government lose almost all of the £122m plus the £8m penalty surcharge.
It depends whether the separate criminal investigation into Barrowman and Mone goes anywhere.
It's a complex area but, broadly, the corporate veil can be pierced where a company exists as an instrument of fraud conducted by the shareholders.
Although that poll is pre-Labour conference, I think just into the I.D. cards mess-up, and after Reform's conference.
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
You would expect a conference bounce for Labour. But with Starmer being so historically disliked, I’m not sure. It’s possible that more media exposure to him will just generate more negative sentiment about him
If the BBC jump onto the Mail's assertion that Starmer's speech effectively put a hit out on Nigel,the story might get worse rather than better. Farage absolutely stole the narrative yesterday. What he said was bollocks, but bollocks sells newspapers.
Labour need to make a lot more of the fact that it was his own teacher who originally raised his far-right schoolday issues, not them.
Some of his contemporaries raised them well before Labour, too, and those accounts have been publicised for years.
There was a bully in the class above us at school who just last year one of my friends mentioned he thought he ought to have been put in Broadmoor to protecct the rest of society. Personally I thought he was like Putin, an over-compensating homosexual, only mildly dangerous, but definitely more dangerous than Farage. Probably not as dangerous as Starmer though.
How long before Starmer introduces a daily hate ? The man clearly is deranged.
A company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone breached a £122m government contract by supplying unsterile personal protective equipment during the Covid pandemic, a judge rules
Whoops.
It’s one thing to take a big pile of money to supply stuff that’s scarce during an emergency, but you’d better made sure that you do actually supply what’s been paid for.
No issues with those who were paid up front but supplied substandard PPE being chased for the money.
How many dodgy companies have anything like their liability left in the pot? PPE Medpro had £600,000 available yesterday before they went into administration. Limited liability means Doug and Michie keep the super yacht. Starmer's Government lose almost all of the £122m plus the £8m penalty surcharge.
It depends whether the separate criminal investigation into Barrowman and Mone goes anywhere.
It's a complex area but, broadly, the corporate veil can be pierced where a company exists as an instrument of fraud conducted by the shareholders.
From the PPE Medpro Accounts
The dispute between the Company and DHSC relating to the supply of gowns by the Company to DHSC in 2020 continues. In December 2022 DHSC commenced proceedings in the Commercial Court to recover £133,577,920.20 plus interest. The Company disputes the claim and served a defence and counterclaim on 20th February 2023. The Company, advised by Leading and Junior Counsel and solicitors, believes that it has a sound defence to the claim.
Presumably learned council were Charles Samek KC, Ashley Cukier and Bláthnaid Breslin (instructed by Grosvenor Law Limited). Or did they change their team? Seems they were paid upfront.
The company has used approximately £4,2 million of reserves to defend the DHSC claim.
As an aside, I can't see £122mn going through these accounts. Were they merely agents for another party who supplied the faulty goods?
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
Women served in the army's Det and Special Reconnaissance Unit in Northern Ireland. For them, the ability to cope with the stresses of undercover work mattered more than classical physical toughness. I think women are still serving actively in the UK's SF. I daresay others on here know more.
Apologies for mad posting. On a bus at Naples airport
You don't normally apologise for mad posting. I once spent two hours standing on an airport bus at Naples Airport during a wildcat strike. When I got on the bus they weren't on strike, and then they were. It's a rite of passage.
Were you contractually reqired to stay on it?
I remember many years ago that the people of Florence would never pay the bus fare. If the inspector got on, they would get off and wait for the next bus.
So the bus company doubled the fares that nobody was paying. What happened? The good people of Florence rioted and burned down the buses...
It was the airport bus taking us from the terminal to the plane. The offer to leave the bus and walk amongst the planes on the stands wasn't available.
Stamer is seemingly the most politically inept PM in living memory, which given some of the recent incumbents takes some doing. I genuinely think he's incapable of doing the job, he can't lead, he can't think ahead and spot blindingly obvious problems, and he's so bloody boring.
I'm afraid boring is not an adjective farmers and small businessmen would use to describe the evil bastard. Sunak was boring and people hate being bored so they vote for evil people like the present government. But only once. At least there won't be another Labour government in my lifetime, not if I live to be a hundred.
Pro-tip: you can save a lot of time in museums by heading straight for the gift shop, where all their best exhibits will be collated and available for purchase in postcard or replica form.
Even better pro tip: ask if you can get into the gift shop without buying a ticket.
The Mormon faith has always seemed to me somewhat strange. But they are often also quite admirable.
This morning with our burned down church still smoldering and four saints murdered, members of the Church of Jesus Christ raised $60k for...checks notes...the shooter's wife and children... https://x.com/DerekjAndersen/status/1973130297739977080
The thread is worth a read, especially as the casualties are aiui from their own community.
It's a powerful and authoritative eirenic stance. That is the type of gesture that could turn around chronic division in the USA, by comparison especially with Trump's 'I hate my enemies, and we will take revenge.' It has potential to build bridges, not walls.
The shooter's family may now be left adrift - given the USA, will possibly be subject to hostility, and have now most likely lost a breadwinner for years, or for life if found guilty.
I can think of parallels, but not many. One may be the disciplined peacefulness of the Civil Rights Movement, or Ghandi's campaign (which i do not know well), or the attitude John Wesley wrote about in his journal of a Moravian community emigrating to the USA when at risk in a storm. Or amongst persecuted church communities in different places, or amongst threatened Muslim communities in the UK asserting their community's values of peace & quiet enjoyment (the legal term) in OUR political maelstrom.
I think the most distinctive tweet is this reply:
Gail Finke @gailfinke While I think this is lovely in theory, does anyone know anything about the wife? I haven't seen much about the shooter at all, and nothing about her. I would like to think she had no idea he meant to do this, but I don't know one way or the other. 10:33 PM · Sep 30, 2025· 5,603 Views Derek Andersen @DerekjAndersen 17h It actually doesn't matter. Our response to the tragedy is not contingent on her feelings or actions regarding us. This is the way.
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
Women served in the army's Det and Special Reconnaissance Unit in Northern Ireland. For them, the ability to cope with the stresses of undercover work mattered more than classical physical toughness. I think women are still serving actively in the UK's SF. I daresay others on here know more.
I think I heard somewhere that women can better withstand G forces better. Useful if flying combat aircraft. In any event can't think why you would exclude females from being pilots - doesn't involve heavy lifting, surely?
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
Women served in the army's Det and Special Reconnaissance Unit in Northern Ireland. For them, the ability to cope with the stresses of undercover work mattered more than classical physical toughness. I think women are still serving actively in the UK's SF. I daresay others on here know more.
I think I heard somewhere that women can better withstand G forces better. Useful if flying combat aircraft. In any event can't think why you would exclude females from being pilots - doesn't involve heavy lifting, surely?
Women are on average smaller and lighter which has its advantages. If you were to design a fighter jet on the basis of only taking pilots before a certain height and weight limit (so excluding most men) then that might have some advantages.
I saw an argument somewhere that an all-female astronaut crew for a Mars mission could have five members for the same weight (including of food and water supplies) as for four male astronauts.
The logical and efficient choice would be to send an all-female crew for the first manned mission to Mars.
Off topic, but cheering: The winner in this American election is impressive:
Suffering from a dangling tooth on a broken jaw, grizzled Fat Bear Week veteran 32 “Chunk” handily defeated an extremely large 856 to become the 2025 champion.
Now in its 11th year, the annual bracket tournament celebrates the bears of Katmai National Park and Preserve as they bulk up for hibernation. Beyond the festive week of online voting, fans also keep track of their favorite bears from spring to fall by watching the Explore.org live cameras positioned around the park in Alaska.
This morning’s grandstanding at Quantico only solidified what we already know: @PeteHegseth continues to disparage and lie about women in the military.
He claimed the military needs to “return to the male standard” in combat jobs (of 1990!), but here’s the truth: there has never been a separate male and female standard. When women entered combat roles, one standard was set, and we’ve been meeting it ever since. You can either do the job or you can’t. Period... https://x.com/AmyMcGrathKY/status/1973080569576624326
What people like Hegseth don't understand is male and female physical capabilities are both distribution curves of some description - with the male curve further to the right of the female one.
That means if you set qualifying criteria at anyone fixed point, you get more men than women meeting it. But some women will always qualify unless you set the bar extremely high such that you struggle to find enough men.
Let's say "run 5km in 20 minutes" - most men can't do it but you'll find far more men than women in an amateur race (see any park run result). But the finalists in the women's 5k world athletics all ran it in around 15 minutes.
So having women in the armed forces is entirely consistent with the idea of "on merit only". You would just suspect fewer than 50% women, which funnily enough is the case already.
It’s also rarely the running that limits larger numbers of women in infantry roles, it’s the running with the same amount of kit that the men have to run with. The kit as a percentage of the carrier’s body weight is less likely to be disproportionate on men and there cannot be a situation where women soldiers are carrying less kit, it’s all necessary, or having only the men in a platoon carrying certain items as it reduces the capability.
Rather ignores the fact that a very large number of roles in modern warfare don't involve much running or pack carrying.
And completely ignores the very large number of issues of more importance to building efficient and capable armed forces.
But I suppose it's of a piece with their 'return to the coal age' crap.
I've a little experience on this. You'd might think a military looking for 'cyber' in these worrying times might be willing to relax the medical. Fair enough, but does limit their talent pool, specially so in the computer world.
Ukrainian Special Forces caused considerable ire among various embeds from Western Special forces, for including soldiers in their (UKrSF) units who didn’t meet extreme physical standards.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
Women served in the army's Det and Special Reconnaissance Unit in Northern Ireland. For them, the ability to cope with the stresses of undercover work mattered more than classical physical toughness. I think women are still serving actively in the UK's SF. I daresay others on here know more.
I think I heard somewhere that women can better withstand G forces better. Useful if flying combat aircraft. In any event can't think why you would exclude females from being pilots - doesn't involve heavy lifting, surely?
Women are on average smaller and lighter which has its advantages. If you were to design a fighter jet on the basis of only taking pilots before a certain height and weight limit (so excluding most men) then that might have some advantages.
I saw an argument somewhere that an all-female astronaut crew for a Mars mission could have five members for the same weight (including of food and water supplies) as for four male astronauts.
The logical and efficient choice would be to send an all-female crew for the first manned mission to Mars.
I suspect Farage will want to send them back to Venus instead.
Pro-tip: you can save a lot of time in museums by heading straight for the gift shop, where all their best exhibits will be collated and available for purchase in postcard or replica form.
Even better pro tip: ask if you can get into the gift shop without buying a ticket.
Have a look at their online shop and you don't have to leave home or even get dressed.
Today I've been listening as wallpaper to various recordings about political involvement of televangelists and similar figures in the early 1980s, in support of the Christian Conservative Right in the USA (which means eg Pat Robertson supporting Reagan, as the then version of Paula White and Trump / Trump's senior figures). I'm looking for comparisons with USA 2025, and also the UK.
I relistened to one of the first 'Gospel' (it's in quotes because it's light Synth Rock, not say folk or country or bluegrass or gospel music) albums I ever bought, called "Meltdown", from an artist called Steve Taylor. He's 67 now. His thing was satire aimed at Evangelical Hypocrisy and Secular Hypocrisy; I mainly agree with his cultural satire, but not with most of his doctrinal emphases. The themes and very sharply observed lyrics stand up very well, and still apply to much that exists today.
This one "We don't need no colour code" was about Bob Jones (old style fundamentalist) university, which maintained its "no interracial dating amongst students" ban until a scandal after Dubya Bush made a speech there in 2000. Even then a written request from parents was required (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/670184.stm):
To illustrate the political links, BJU had had speeches made, or contact with their principal, from Ronald Reagan, Dan Quayle, Pat Buchanan, Phil Gramm, Bob Dole, and Alan Keyes - for a start. More recently, BJU has received Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Mike Huckabee, Scott Walker. Jeb Bush, Carson, Tom Cruz.
For MTV nerds, one of the songs - "Meltdown at Madame Tussauds", was the first gospel song video featured on the station. It was about the ephemeral nature of celebrity and fame. I find the metaphors on this one a bit clunky. The video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jey8tLfokbs
To me, and maybe two other PBers, interesting stuff.
Comments
If the bond markets don't like it, they may both have to go.
Not sure who steps in though to regain the confidence of the markets.
I think you're seriously underestimating how much inertia there is to do these things. In the Tories a few backbenchers can club together and force a vote, that simply isn't possible for Labour MPs.
It seems to me, this simple accountant, that the accounts for the last four years are works of fiction as well. You should only recognise revenue when its earned, not received; and if they received £122m for this PPE but never delivered it, it should've sat on the balance sheet as deferred income. Which it obviously hasn't.
But let's be honest, I'm being too charitable. The accounts filed for all of the last four years are complete bollocks. PPE MedPro simply got the cash, passed it same day to the shareholders/other spongers and never fulfilled their end of the deal. It might even be said.... they never intended to.
https://armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2025/u-s-stratotankers-surge-toward-qatar-raising-speculation-of-iran-strike-amid-rising-tensions
Explain to those with knee-jerk support the dangers, unintended consequences, totalitarian nature, cost, ineffectiveness against its supposed purpose etc etc and the 'support' melts away into opposition very quickly.
This is not a partisan point. I’d quite like him to stay as he is personally destroying Labour as Truss did for the Tories - but maybe worse
However I don’t believe his position is sustainable ergo it won’t be sustained
What happens about the legal fees?
Presumably the plaintiff doesn't become liable for the legal fees despite winning but not recovering both compensation and costs
Do the toxic scrote's legal team get paid?
Is there a mutual "fairplay" arrangement where any money on account would be turned over to the plaintiff's legal team?
If not this does seem to introduce an incentive to operate in bad faith.
The UK govt could learn some lessons from Trump here, seize their assets and revoke their citizenship under an executive order.
Which is why everyone's scrabbling around to obtain anti-drone kit.
But there's no single good solution, and it's going to take up an increasing amount of defence budgets.
There are potential targets everywhere, and an increasing proliferation of different drone systems.
We're relatively fortunate in being quite some distance away from Russia, but even so, it can't be particularly hard for a determined group to smuggle stuff into the UK.
I have been saying for a while now that I think we’re far from Peak Reform and I stand by that view.
No, Labour are stuck with him until he decides to resign or voters have had enough. 2028 is probably the earliest they can realistically remove him with the kind of cabinet resignations you're imagining.
...in June, 53% of voters surveyed said they were in favour of digital ID cards for all Britons, while 19% were opposed...
...Just 31% of people surveyed after Starmer’s announcement over the weekend said they were supportive of the scheme, with 45% saying they were opposed. Of those, 32% said they were strongly opposed...
Does British military radar pick up drones, or is it only looking for larger jets and missiles?
There was even war games, after the war, where Bomber Command re-ran raids, and watched them from the German control rooms, to verify their deception tactics.
By the end of the war, about 25% of the effort of each mass raid went into deception/decoy raids on other targets.
Everything else is just hobby parts.
Interceptor drones seem more promising, but you'd still need vast numbers of them and to be able to spot incoming drones.
The regime change-like language is starting again
More generally, if it's looking in the right direction it probably does (Dura ?)... just as it will pick up birds in flight, and be programmed to ignore them in some/most circumstances. There's a LOT of clutter, so small drones are almost impossible to track systematically across the whole country, I would guess. And the ease with which Germany and Denmark have been overflown suggests there isn't yet any NATO system set up to prevent them.
Typhoons or F35s carrying ASRAAM are very expensive way to shoot down a quite small number of drones. And we don't have all that much in the way of surface to air missiles across the country,
https://www.centreforcities.org/reader/cities-outlook-2020/air-quality-cities/
I assume they won't get far with whatever Chinese supplier sent them the rubbish in the first place.
I know they would take longer to get to certain places where drones are spotted than fighters but the flip side is they can be spread along strategic locations without the need for airfields etc.
Someone here will obviously know the flaw in the idea but got to be cheaper than using Typhoons and F-35s?
🚨 Westminster Voting Intention:
➡️ REF: 34% (+4)
🌹 LAB: 22% (-2)
🌳 CON: 17% (-2)
🔶️ LDEM: 11% (=)
🟢 GRN: 8% (=)
From @Survation
From 24th - 25th September
Changes with 2nd September
Brits dislike being morally lectured, especially by a hypocritical prick like Starmer
Brits dislike being morally lectured, especially by a hypocritical prick like Starmer
I suspect probably a couple of points added to Labour since then. Kemi could even get a bounce next week, aswell.
Not satisfied with their Charlie Kirk hit all these Antifa hit squads are apparently after our own national treasure.
The left really needs to row back on these demands for violence against politicians.
https://share.google/pHzrRWXkmRUfB6mxX
https://www.unmannedairspace.info/latest-news-and-information/airspace-world-2025-thales-launches-airport-c-uas-system-with-18km-range/
the original reason for the “Boris Bus” was that a hybrid power train was required to reduce particulates and SO2 emissions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Precision_Kill_Weapon_System
Some of his contemporaries raised them well before Labour, too, and those accounts have been publicised for years.
https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/2019-10/11-aveillant-quilter.pdf
Also:
https://www.aerospacetestinginternational.com/news/drones-air-taxis/uk-drone-testing-corridor-to-trial-holographic-radar.html
But of course, this is all four years too late now isn't it?
Not much use against terrorist style attacks.
I think we have about 50, in total, so not a load, and they can't be everywhere.
"Do you really want that?"
"Yeah."
"Are you sure? Only last time, you didn't like it."
"Want it."
"Here you are then."
Pause.
"Don't like it."
Stephen Kinnock says Michelle Mone will repay the £122m.
And I have an invisible Garden Bridge to sell him.
Estimates vary for the cost of the Shahed type drones Russia uses in large numbers against Ukraine, but Russia might get as many as 2,000 for the cost of one Apache helicopter.
Apparently, having drone operators and other tech specialists actually wearing the coveted badges without having them run a couple of marathons wearing 50Kg of kit was letting the Special Forces community down.
FFS there are more effective remedies for reimbursement buying off ebay with paypal
NEW THREAD
https://x.com/miffythegamer/status/1973385257505165656?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
I remember many years ago that the people of Florence would never pay the bus fare. If the inspector got on, they would get off and wait for the next bus.
So the bus company doubled the fares that nobody was paying. What happened? The good people of Florence rioted and burned down the buses...
Another scrote who has difficulty spelling his own name.
Pessimistically, I can see being ripped off in cryptoscams just increasing his supporters rage at the world.
It's a complex area but, broadly, the corporate veil can be pierced where a company exists as an instrument of fraud conducted by the shareholders.
How long before Starmer introduces a daily hate ? The man clearly is deranged.
The dispute between the Company and DHSC relating to the supply of gowns by the Company to DHSC in 2020 continues. In December 2022 DHSC commenced proceedings in the Commercial Court to recover £133,577,920.20 plus interest. The Company disputes the claim and served a defence and counterclaim on 20th February 2023. The Company, advised by Leading and Junior Counsel and solicitors, believes that it has a sound defence to the claim.
Presumably learned council were Charles Samek KC, Ashley Cukier and Bláthnaid Breslin (instructed by Grosvenor Law
Limited). Or did they change their team? Seems they were paid upfront.
The company has used approximately £4,2 million of reserves to defend the DHSC claim.
As an aside, I can't see £122mn going through these accounts. Were they merely agents for another party who supplied the faulty goods?
It's a powerful and authoritative eirenic stance. That is the type of gesture that could turn around chronic division in the USA, by comparison especially with Trump's 'I hate my enemies, and we will take revenge.' It has potential to build bridges, not walls.
The shooter's family may now be left adrift - given the USA, will possibly be subject to hostility, and have now most likely lost a breadwinner for years, or for life if found guilty.
I can think of parallels, but not many. One may be the disciplined peacefulness of the Civil Rights Movement, or Ghandi's campaign (which i do not know well), or the attitude John Wesley wrote about in his journal of a Moravian community emigrating to the USA when at risk in a storm. Or amongst persecuted church communities in different places, or amongst threatened Muslim communities in the UK asserting their community's values of peace & quiet enjoyment (the legal term) in OUR political maelstrom.
I think the most distinctive tweet is this reply:
Gail Finke @gailfinke
While I think this is lovely in theory, does anyone know anything about the wife? I haven't seen much about the shooter at all, and nothing about her. I would like to think she had no idea he meant to do this, but I don't know one way or the other.
10:33 PM · Sep 30, 2025· 5,603 Views
Derek Andersen @DerekjAndersen 17h
It actually doesn't matter. Our response to the tragedy is not contingent on her feelings or actions regarding us. This is the way.
The political responses will be a thing to watch.
I saw an argument somewhere that an all-female astronaut crew for a Mars mission could have five members for the same weight (including of food and water supplies) as for four male astronauts.
The logical and efficient choice would be to send an all-female crew for the first manned mission to Mars.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2025/09/30/fat-bear-week-2025-winner/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Bear_Week
(I hope PB will cover this annual election fully, beginning next year.)
Today I've been listening as wallpaper to various recordings about political involvement of televangelists and similar figures in the early 1980s, in support of the Christian Conservative Right in the USA (which means eg Pat Robertson supporting Reagan, as the then version of Paula White and Trump / Trump's senior figures). I'm looking for comparisons with USA 2025, and also the UK.
I relistened to one of the first 'Gospel' (it's in quotes because it's light Synth Rock, not say folk or country or bluegrass or gospel music) albums I ever bought, called "Meltdown", from an artist called Steve Taylor. He's 67 now. His thing was satire aimed at Evangelical Hypocrisy and Secular Hypocrisy; I mainly agree with his cultural satire, but not with most of his doctrinal emphases. The themes and very sharply observed lyrics stand up very well, and still apply to much that exists today.
This one "We don't need no colour code" was about Bob Jones (old style fundamentalist) university, which maintained its "no interracial dating amongst students" ban until a scandal after Dubya Bush made a speech there in 2000. Even then a written request from parents was required (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/670184.stm):
To illustrate the political links, BJU had had speeches made, or contact with their principal, from Ronald Reagan, Dan Quayle, Pat Buchanan, Phil Gramm, Bob Dole, and Alan Keyes - for a start. More recently, BJU has received Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Mike Huckabee, Scott Walker. Jeb Bush, Carson, Tom Cruz.
This song is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1M5ZVm8ea1U
For MTV nerds, one of the songs - "Meltdown at Madame Tussauds", was the first gospel song video featured on the station. It was about the ephemeral nature of celebrity and fame. I find the metaphors on this one a bit clunky. The video is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jey8tLfokbs
To me, and maybe two other PBers, interesting stuff.