In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
I don't know the context of those accounts of cannibalism in 19thC Formosa - but cannibalism was, several times during the century, widespread in China, as a symptom and result of devastating famines.
(See also those of the 17thC.)
The Taiwanese cannibalism is historically verified. It really happened
There are multiple credible reports from various sources, some quite unpleasantly detailed. I'll spare the forum the recipes
I'm not arguing with you about that (not least because I don't have the information). I was more curious about the background circumstances, rather than the practical details.
I can tell you! I've been researching
It's not famine, it's literally medico-gastronomic: it's because they regarded the tribes as sub-human (they were very primitive head hunting tribes). So as sub human - more like animals, it became morally permissible to eat them, especially delicate bits like the heart etc - which gave you strength, supposedly. The practise was noted by sober outsiders, including an American consul, James Davidson, and a Canadian presbyterian minister, George Mackay, there are also extant bureaucratic records saying "on this occasion we must not eat human meat" - clearly proving that on some occasions this DID happen
On Mackay: he records coming across a crowd awaiting the execution of an aboriginal warrior, and he noted: "Scores were there on purpose to get parts of the body for food and medicine ... the heart is eaten, flesh taken off in strips, and bones boiled to a jelly and preserved as a specific for malarial fever."
Another amazing fact. Head-hunting in Taiwan persisted into the 1920s
And it was the aboriginal Taiwanese who spread out to become the Polynesians.
Malayo-Polynesian languages were not spoken in Taiwan, only the Formosan branch of Austronesian.
I don't know enough to debate in detail and Mrs C is currently doing interesting, and potentially flavourful, things to the carcass of a chicken, so my time is limited, but I thought Austronesian was a precursor of Malayo-Polynesian?
Austronesian is the language family, like the Indo-European family.
Formosan and Malayo-Polynesian are the two main branches of that family (like Romance, Germanic, Slavic, Iranian in Indo-European).
Noted, with thanks. Aren't the Madagascan languages branches, too? Which is quite surprising giving the distances required to travel, and the islands nearness to Africa.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
I don't know the context of those accounts of cannibalism in 19thC Formosa - but cannibalism was, several times during the century, widespread in China, as a symptom and result of devastating famines.
(See also those of the 17thC.)
The Taiwanese cannibalism is historically verified. It really happened
There are multiple credible reports from various sources, some quite unpleasantly detailed. I'll spare the forum the recipes
I'm not arguing with you about that (not least because I don't have the information). I was more curious about the background circumstances, rather than the practical details.
I can tell you! I've been researching
It's not famine, it's literally medico-gastronomic: it's because they regarded the tribes as sub-human (they were very primitive head hunting tribes). So as sub human - more like animals, it became morally permissible to eat them, especially delicate bits like the heart etc - which gave you strength, supposedly. The practise was noted by sober outsiders, including an American consul, James Davidson, and a Canadian presbyterian minister, George Mackay, there are also extant bureaucratic records saying "on this occasion we must not eat human meat" - clearly proving that on some occasions this DID happen
On Mackay: he records coming across a crowd awaiting the execution of an aboriginal warrior, and he noted: "Scores were there on purpose to get parts of the body for food and medicine ... the heart is eaten, flesh taken off in strips, and bones boiled to a jelly and preserved as a specific for malarial fever."
Another amazing fact. Head-hunting in Taiwan persisted into the 1920s
And it was the aboriginal Taiwanese who spread out to become the Polynesians.
Malayo-Polynesian languages were not spoken in Taiwan, only the Formosan branch of Austronesian.
I don't know enough to debate in detail and Mrs C is currently doing interesting, and potentially flavourful, things to the carcass of a chicken, so my time is limited, but I thought Austronesian was a precursor of Malayo-Polynesian?
Austronesian is the language family, like the Indo-European family.
Formosan and Malayo-Polynesian are the two main branches of that family (like Romance, Germanic, Slavic, Iranian in Indo-European).
Noted, with thanks. Aren't the Madagascan languages branches, too? Which is quite surprising giving the distances required to travel, and the islands nearness to Africa.
Malagasy is the language of Madagascar, it is part of the Malayo-Polynesian branch, with its closest relative (linguistically) being Ma'anyan, still spoken in Borneo.
That’s not being an idiot - quite the opposite. He knows he’s all in on Trump. But he couldn’t bring himself to say “no” so he avoided the question. Not very well, admittedly, but that’s what he was aiming for
It would be interesting to do a list of people who worked for Trump and came out with their reputations enhanced.
A few of the people from the first term? Bolton for example “I may be crazy but I’m not that crazy”? Nikki Haley (she suffered a little - “why did she work for him”? - but not hugely)
2 posts from UAE’s @AnwarGargash (Presidential advisor) in the last 20 mins
🔷 Iran’s aggression is reshaping Gulf security thinking. This is no longer about a ceasefire. It’s about LONG TERM SECURITY in the Gulf
🔷 The priority is to counter Iran’s nuclear program, missiles, drones and threats to key shipping lanes
🔷 The fallout may be the opposite of what Tehran intended: a more unified Gulf, stronger militaries and deeper security ties with Washington
“Deeper security ties with the US”
A scenario where Iran poses a “permanent state of threat” is inconceivable
Again, this screams "nukes" to me
Because that's the only way to totally subdue Iran and remove it "permanently" as a threat, without sending in 2 million US troops, who would inevitably be defeated a la Vietnamienne, anyway
Jeez. I wish I didn't think this; but I do, increasingly
If Saudi had them, would Iran be closing the Straits?
Maybe the Trump clan will deliver nukes to Riyadh for their billions in gratuities. Then problem belong GCC.
Was talking yesterday with someone in oil business who lives in Dubai
His comment was that the states in the region might well buy nukes, if Iran gets the bomb. From the Israelis.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
Of course lots of nasty stuff. But what I mean is on the whole and relative to other great nations, empires and powers.
I disagree. China's imperial history is easily as brutal as anything in the west - or the Mughals or Ottomans
What makes it less visible is
1. It feels culturally remote to us, we don't instantly grasp who or what the "Dzungar" are
and
2. Chinese imperialism has been land-based and contiguous (like Russian and American imperialism). ie they invade and conquer neighbouring lands and expand thereby. That *feels* less aggressive than oceanic imperialism as done by the Brits and French, but the feeling is an illusion
I think that's essentially true, though warring states, and subsequent struggles for control of empire (which is a lot of that history) is really quite different from the building of the Russian and American empires.
Genghis Khan is obviously a massive and brutal exception/anomaly to that dynamic (and not Chinese).
Whoever upthread suggested over history the Chinese empire is 'more sinned against than sinning' is breathtakingly wrong. For thousands of years they have dished out brutality on the scale of the Romans. The bit of history for which they were on the receiving end was in the general scheme of things, pretty brief and comparatively mild.
Yes, but we're assessing relative to others. All empires are net abusers. People will tend to view it depending on where they're standing. In China, for example, they'll speak none too kindly (historically) of the British and the Japanese.
Can't recall anything especially vicious from the Iranians, in their previous incarnation as Persians, but I'm happy to be informed otherwise.
depends which Persian Empire you mean, but they were fairly typical in the "If you shut up and pay taxes, OKish. If you don't we rm -rf you until you get with the whole shut-up-and-pay-taxes thing"
Your basic Empiring, really.
The British Empire got this off to a fine art. The British North Borneo Company issued a medal with the clasp 'Punitive Expedition'. FAFO with the British Empire.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
Of course lots of nasty stuff. But what I mean is on the whole and relative to other great nations, empires and powers.
I disagree. China's imperial history is easily as brutal as anything in the west - or the Mughals or Ottomans
What makes it less visible is
1. It feels culturally remote to us, we don't instantly grasp who or what the "Dzungar" are
and
2. Chinese imperialism has been land-based and contiguous (like Russian and American imperialism). ie they invade and conquer neighbouring lands and expand thereby. That *feels* less aggressive than oceanic imperialism as done by the Brits and French, but the feeling is an illusion
I think that's essentially true, though warring states, and subsequent struggles for control of empire (which is a lot of that history) is really quite different from the building of the Russian and American empires.
Genghis Khan is obviously a massive and brutal exception/anomaly to that dynamic (and not Chinese).
Whoever upthread suggested over history the Chinese empire is 'more sinned against than sinning' is breathtakingly wrong. For thousands of years they have dished out brutality on the scale of the Romans. The bit of history for which they were on the receiving end was in the general scheme of things, pretty brief and comparatively mild.
Yes, but we're assessing relative to others. All empires are net abusers. People will tend to view it depending on where they're standing. In China, for example, they'll speak none too kindly (historically) of the British and the Japanese.
Can't recall anything especially vicious from the Iranians, in their previous incarnation as Persians, but I'm happy to be informed otherwise.
The ancient Jews might disagree - as might the Greeks. And both Valerian and Marcus Crassus
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
Of course lots of nasty stuff. But what I mean is on the whole and relative to other great nations, empires and powers.
I disagree. China's imperial history is easily as brutal as anything in the west - or the Mughals or Ottomans
What makes it less visible is
1. It feels culturally remote to us, we don't instantly grasp who or what the "Dzungar" are
and
2. Chinese imperialism has been land-based and contiguous (like Russian and American imperialism). ie they invade and conquer neighbouring lands and expand thereby. That *feels* less aggressive than oceanic imperialism as done by the Brits and French, but the feeling is an illusion
I think that's essentially true, though warring states, and subsequent struggles for control of empire (which is a lot of that history) is really quite different from the building of the Russian and American empires.
Genghis Khan is obviously a massive and brutal exception/anomaly to that dynamic (and not Chinese).
Whoever upthread suggested over history the Chinese empire is 'more sinned against than sinning' is breathtakingly wrong. For thousands of years they have dished out brutality on the scale of the Romans. The bit of history for which they were on the receiving end was in the general scheme of things, pretty brief and comparatively mild.
Yes, but we're assessing relative to others. All empires are net abusers. People will tend to view it depending on where they're standing. In China, for example, they'll speak none too kindly (historically) of the British and the Japanese.
Can't recall anything especially vicious from the Iranians, in their previous incarnation as Persians, but I'm happy to be informed otherwise.
The ancient Jews might disagree - as might the Greeks. And both Valerian and Marcus Crassus
The Jews were saved from slavery in Babylon by the Persians.
2 posts from UAE’s @AnwarGargash (Presidential advisor) in the last 20 mins
🔷 Iran’s aggression is reshaping Gulf security thinking. This is no longer about a ceasefire. It’s about LONG TERM SECURITY in the Gulf
🔷 The priority is to counter Iran’s nuclear program, missiles, drones and threats to key shipping lanes
🔷 The fallout may be the opposite of what Tehran intended: a more unified Gulf, stronger militaries and deeper security ties with Washington
“Deeper security ties with the US”
A scenario where Iran poses a “permanent state of threat” is inconceivable
Again, this screams "nukes" to me
Because that's the only way to totally subdue Iran and remove it "permanently" as a threat, without sending in 2 million US troops, who would inevitably be defeated a la Vietnamienne, anyway
Jeez. I wish I didn't think this; but I do, increasingly
If Saudi had them, would Iran be closing the Straits?
Maybe the Trump clan will deliver nukes to Riyadh for their billions in gratuities. Then problem belong GCC.
Was talking yesterday with someone in oil business who lives in Dubai
His comment was that the states in the region might well buy nukes, if Iran gets the bomb. From the Israelis.
Keep it in the Muslim family. Get them from Pakistan.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
2 posts from UAE’s @AnwarGargash (Presidential advisor) in the last 20 mins
🔷 Iran’s aggression is reshaping Gulf security thinking. This is no longer about a ceasefire. It’s about LONG TERM SECURITY in the Gulf
🔷 The priority is to counter Iran’s nuclear program, missiles, drones and threats to key shipping lanes
🔷 The fallout may be the opposite of what Tehran intended: a more unified Gulf, stronger militaries and deeper security ties with Washington
“Deeper security ties with the US”
A scenario where Iran poses a “permanent state of threat” is inconceivable
Again, this screams "nukes" to me
Because that's the only way to totally subdue Iran and remove it "permanently" as a threat, without sending in 2 million US troops, who would inevitably be defeated a la Vietnamienne, anyway
Jeez. I wish I didn't think this; but I do, increasingly
If Saudi had them, would Iran be closing the Straits?
Maybe the Trump clan will deliver nukes to Riyadh for their billions in gratuities. Then problem belong GCC.
Was talking yesterday with someone in oil business who lives in Dubai
His comment was that the states in the region might well buy nukes, if Iran gets the bomb. From the Israelis.
Keep it in the Muslim family. Get them from Pakistan.
There's a reason Saudi Arabia have a defence pact with Pakistan.
It would be interesting to do a list of people who worked for Trump and came out with their reputations enhanced.
A few of the people from the first term? Bolton for example “I may be crazy but I’m not that crazy”? Nikki Haley (she suffered a little - “why did she work for him”? - but not hugely)
2 posts from UAE’s @AnwarGargash (Presidential advisor) in the last 20 mins
🔷 Iran’s aggression is reshaping Gulf security thinking. This is no longer about a ceasefire. It’s about LONG TERM SECURITY in the Gulf
🔷 The priority is to counter Iran’s nuclear program, missiles, drones and threats to key shipping lanes
🔷 The fallout may be the opposite of what Tehran intended: a more unified Gulf, stronger militaries and deeper security ties with Washington
“Deeper security ties with the US”
A scenario where Iran poses a “permanent state of threat” is inconceivable
Again, this screams "nukes" to me
Because that's the only way to totally subdue Iran and remove it "permanently" as a threat, without sending in 2 million US troops, who would inevitably be defeated a la Vietnamienne, anyway
Jeez. I wish I didn't think this; but I do, increasingly
If Saudi had them, would Iran be closing the Straits?
Maybe the Trump clan will deliver nukes to Riyadh for their billions in gratuities. Then problem belong GCC.
Was talking yesterday with someone in oil business who lives in Dubai
His comment was that the states in the region might well buy nukes, if Iran gets the bomb. From the Israelis.
Keep it in the Muslim family. Get them from Pakistan.
Apparently, they are not keen on Pakistan. Now, why might that be?
His other comment is that high UK energy prices are killing off the manufacturing around Aberdeen - a bunch of small companies making high quality equipment for oil related stuff there. Even without the North Sea, they stood a chance - good reputation in the business. But 'leecy prices that are x times those in other countries is killing them.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
That’s not being an idiot - quite the opposite. He knows he’s all in on Trump. But he couldn’t bring himself to say “no” so he avoided the question. Not very well, admittedly, but that’s what he was aiming for
It shows the extent to which Trump has debauched everything, that people in big positions in American public life refuse to embrace basic decency for fear of his disfavour. And the more they behave like this the worse it gets. Enablers of evil and collaborators in it. They'll be vilified in the future and it will be fully deserved.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
I don't know if anyone on here is a Reform member or activist.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Alongside military bases, those financial entities that finance the US military budget are legitimate targets. US treasury bonds are soaked in Iranians' blood. Purchase them, and you purchase a strike on your HQ and assets.
We monitor your portfolios. This is your final notice.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Diesel prices have gone up much faster than petrol.
I saw diesel at 175p at a petrol station going into Cornwall today. Even Sainsbury's in Plymouth was 169.9p
At my nearest filling station it's already at 179.9, although there are others that are quite a bit cheaper.
139p in Gloucester this morning. Surprised at that Plymouth number.
for diesel
All this nonsense about the cost of fuel etc. It'll cost many a few pounds, but that's it.
I'm really quite surprised to see you amongst the apparently cheapskate reactionaries.
I was merely asking if he was talking about diesel as I saw it today at 167.9. As you say it will not be of any great concern to me. As I previously posted , I care not a jot.
Alongside military bases, those financial entities that finance the US military budget are legitimate targets. US treasury bonds are soaked in Iranians' blood. Purchase them, and you purchase a strike on your HQ and assets.
We monitor your portfolios. This is your final notice.
Trump and Bibi bite off more than they can chew shocker !
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
I don't know the context of those accounts of cannibalism in 19thC Formosa - but cannibalism was, several times during the century, widespread in China, as a symptom and result of devastating famines.
(See also those of the 17thC.)
The Taiwanese cannibalism is historically verified. It really happened
There are multiple credible reports from various sources, some quite unpleasantly detailed. I'll spare the forum the recipes
I'm not arguing with you about that (not least because I don't have the information). I was more curious about the background circumstances, rather than the practical details.
I can tell you! I've been researching
It's not famine, it's literally medico-gastronomic: it's because they regarded the tribes as sub-human (they were very primitive head hunting tribes). So as sub human - more like animals, it became morally permissible to eat them, especially delicate bits like the heart etc - which gave you strength, supposedly. The practise was noted by sober outsiders, including an American consul, James Davidson, and a Canadian presbyterian minister, George Mackay, there are also extant bureaucratic records saying "on this occasion we must not eat human meat" - clearly proving that on some occasions this DID happen
On Mackay: he records coming across a crowd awaiting the execution of an aboriginal warrior, and he noted: "Scores were there on purpose to get parts of the body for food and medicine ... the heart is eaten, flesh taken off in strips, and bones boiled to a jelly and preserved as a specific for malarial fever."
Another amazing fact. Head-hunting in Taiwan persisted into the 1920s
It brings to mind ancient humans where human bones are found with signs of cannibalism and theories range from religious ritual (as often with archaeologists) desperation/starvation or perhaps as a desecration of their enemy by demonstrating utter victory by ensuring the whole of the enemy isn’t intact or about humiliation.
I’m sure I read that there is a reluctance to look at tribes such as in Papua NG, Taiwan, the Amazon and translate their behaviours onto ancient peoples but in my mind it’s a pretty clear case that they are the best places to look to understand the past.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
I don't know the context of those accounts of cannibalism in 19thC Formosa - but cannibalism was, several times during the century, widespread in China, as a symptom and result of devastating famines.
(See also those of the 17thC.)
The Taiwanese cannibalism is historically verified. It really happened
There are multiple credible reports from various sources, some quite unpleasantly detailed. I'll spare the forum the recipes
I'm not arguing with you about that (not least because I don't have the information). I was more curious about the background circumstances, rather than the practical details.
I can tell you! I've been researching
It's not famine, it's literally medico-gastronomic: it's because they regarded the tribes as sub-human (they were very primitive head hunting tribes). So as sub human - more like animals, it became morally permissible to eat them, especially delicate bits like the heart etc - which gave you strength, supposedly. The practise was noted by sober outsiders, including an American consul, James Davidson, and a Canadian presbyterian minister, George Mackay, there are also extant bureaucratic records saying "on this occasion we must not eat human meat" - clearly proving that on some occasions this DID happen
On Mackay: he records coming across a crowd awaiting the execution of an aboriginal warrior, and he noted: "Scores were there on purpose to get parts of the body for food and medicine ... the heart is eaten, flesh taken off in strips, and bones boiled to a jelly and preserved as a specific for malarial fever."
Another amazing fact. Head-hunting in Taiwan persisted into the 1920s
It brings to mind ancient humans where human bones are found with signs of cannibalism and theories range from religious ritual (as often with archaeologists) desperation/starvation or perhaps as a desecration of their enemy by demonstrating utter victory by ensuring the whole of the enemy isn’t intact or about humiliation.
I’m sure I read that there is a reluctance to look at tribes such as in Papua NG, Taiwan, the Amazon and translate their behaviours onto ancient peoples but in my mind it’s a pretty clear case that they are the best places to look to understand the past.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are increasing their purchases of mortgage-backed securities to stabilize a volatile market with widening bond spreads. This move follows President Trump's directive to buy $200 billion in MBS to enhance housing affordability amid rising mortgage rates. The increased buying may help mitigate some market pressures caused by the US-Iran conflict, which has led to higher borrowing costs. Fannie and Freddie's retained portfolios have grown significantly, reaching $278 billion as of January, despite a substantial decline since 2008.
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Diesel prices have gone up much faster than petrol.
I saw diesel at 175p at a petrol station going into Cornwall today. Even Sainsbury's in Plymouth was 169.9p
At my nearest filling station it's already at 179.9, although there are others that are quite a bit cheaper.
139p in Gloucester this morning. Surprised at that Plymouth number.
Diesel at 139, are you sure ?!?
E10 was £131.9 at Tesco Bridgend sold out by lunchtime. All E10 is sold out in Supermarkets in Bridgend. Got unleaded at Asda/Esso petrol station on A48 in Cowbridge £150.9 for E10. Says it is going up at midnight there. I am on half a tank of Diesel, tomorrow is going to be an expensive day. Going to North Wales on Tuesday. Oh no!
Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.
I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.
But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...
I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.
However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.
Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.
So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.
Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.
Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.
And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.
It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.
Increasing North Sea drilling would do nothing to help UK energy prices in this time of crisis. Prices are set on global markets and increased North Sea drilling would have little impact on global supply.
Except this is not strictly true in reality. Or at least it would not be if we had kept a sensible energy policy.
One of the consequences of shutting down the UK North Sea has been the massive knock on effect on refineries. This has not yet impacted petrol refining but has massively reduced the capacity for diesel refining. So we have to import a lot more diesel which makes it both more expensive on a day to day basis and more prone to the impact of sudden jumps in the oil price.
This is why the price of diesel has jumped far more than petrol.
And given that so much of our distribution network relies on diesel transport this is also why the issues in the Middle East will have a much bigger effect on inflation..
Diesel prices have gone up much faster than petrol.
I saw diesel at 175p at a petrol station going into Cornwall today. Even Sainsbury's in Plymouth was 169.9p
At my nearest filling station it's already at 179.9, although there are others that are quite a bit cheaper.
139p in Gloucester this morning. Surprised at that Plymouth number.
Diesel at 139, are you sure ?!?
E10 was £131.9 at Tesco Bridgend sold out by lunchtime. All E10 is sold out in Supermarkets in Bridgend. Got unleaded at Asda/Esso petrol station on A48 in Cowbridge £150.9 for E10. Says it is going up at midnight there. I am on half a tank of Diesel, tomorrow is going to be an expensive day. Going to North Wales on Tuesday. Oh no!
Petrol £1.36 at Sainsbury's in the Midlands on Friday morning - last time I walked past my local garage.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
It would be interesting to do a list of people who worked for Trump and came out with their reputations enhanced.
A few of the people from the first term? Bolton for example “I may be crazy but I’m not that crazy”? Nikki Haley (she suffered a little - “why did she work for him”? - but not hugely)
Jared?
What, his reputation as a massive international grifter ?
I don't know if anyone on here is a Reform member or activist.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
We started off with the noble intention that everyone should be a proper candidate. With a commitment to campaigning, and all that sort of thing. But as there weren't 90 coming forward, barrels had to be scraped, and paper candidates such as yours truly will be appearing in no-hope wards.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
we shall FUK them on the beaches, we shall FUK them in the hills, we shall FUK them with growing strength and growing confidence in the air...
I don't know if anyone on here is a Reform member or activist.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
We started off with the noble intention that everyone should be a proper candidate. With a commitment to campaigning, and all that sort of thing. But as there weren't 90 coming forward, barrels had to be scraped, and paper candidates such as yours truly will be appearing in no-hope wards.
Yeah, I've played that game. A long day in a target Ward then off to the Count where you don't look at the votes in your own patch but are watching what's happening in the important Wards.
One time, I almost missed my own declaration as I was watching the ballots in another Count so had to run across the hall to get on stage and discover I had got 150 votes and finished stone bonking last.
You still have to do all the paperwork of nominations but the expenses return was very easy.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It almost certainly worked - you can't catch malaria when you're a boiled down soup.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
All this Trump unhinged is all very well.....but what would you be saying if the loony religious leaders in Iran attacked the West/Israel with Nuclear weapons. You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
This is the best news for Unionists in many a year.
George Galloway U-turns on Scottish independence for 2026 elections
POLITICAL firebrand George Galloway has U-turned on his opposition to Scottish independence, saying the “British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt”.
In comments posted on Facebook but delivered as a speech to Workers Party Scotland members, Galloway said he had changed his opinion and “if God spares me, I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom”.
In the 2021 Holyrood elections, Galloway stood for the “All for Unity” campaign and pledged to “tackle the scourge of separatism”. He said he would vote Conservative in a bid to court Unionist voters, but his campaign group ultimately failed to win any seats...
...The former Labour politician is now standing for Workers Party Scotland in the 2026 Holyrood elections in Glasgow Southside. He is also second on the party’s Glasgow regional list, behind lead candidate Yvonne Ridley.
Ahead of a campaign launch event in Govan on Friday, March 27, Galloway said his party would support a push for a second independence referendum – and that he personally would campaign for a Yes vote.
“We go into the coming elections for Holyrood in May, behind our lead candidate Yvonne Ridley, wholly committed to a second referendum on the issue of Scottish independence,” he said.
“We demand that the votes of all pro-referendum parties in this election be counted as the stated will of the Scottish public. In other words these elections must be explicitly called a referendum on a referendum.”
Galloway went on: “Now the question inevitably arises: if we get the referendum how will you vote? For which side will you campaign?
“Well the party’s position at this moment is that this remains hypothetical. Let’s win the referendum argument and then decide. I understand this and don’t seek to railroad my colleagues in any way. Unlike our rivals the so-called ‘Labour’ party we are a democratic organisation and the members will decide.
“But as a born and bred Scot with some history in this country I feel obligated to make my own personal position clear.
“As Marx (Groucho) said: ‘When the facts change, so do my opinions.’
“As a former opponent of independence I have changed my opinion. I will support Scottish independence at the next referendum.
“If God spares me I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom. The time has come for unity and independence in Ireland and independence for Scotland and Wales.
“The British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt for reasons I have adumbrated so many times on screen and in print and will continue to do.”
"You have the watches, we have the time" as the Taliban apparently used to say about the US.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 2h But Iran has weathered long periods of ultra-low oil exports. Back in 2020-22, Iran endured American "maximum pressure" on its petroleum industry, with exports at times down 90% from today's levels. And Iran didn't buckle then. Thus, it's unlikely to do so now.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 2h Unlike the Islamic Republic, Trump doesn’t have the benefit of time. He needs to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in days or, at most, weeks or oil prices would rally. He doesn’t have months to crank up the pressure on Iran via Kharg to accept a deal. Time favours Tehran.
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
China has been an Empire for ages and Empires do heinous things to enforce Imperial hegemony over their reluctant subjects, as critics of the shorter-lived British Empire are wont to point out (me included). I think there's essentially only been about a century when China wasn't imposing Imperial control, in more than two millennia of its history.
To say that China was, "more sinned against than sinning," is such an incuriously Eurocentric view of history.
I don't know if anyone on here is a Reform member or activist.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
We started off with the noble intention that everyone should be a proper candidate. With a commitment to campaigning, and all that sort of thing. But as there weren't 90 coming forward, barrels had to be scraped, and paper candidates such as yours truly will be appearing in no-hope wards.
Yeah, I've played that game. A long day in a target Ward then off to the Count where you don't look at the votes in your own patch but are watching what's happening in the important Wards.
One time, I almost missed my own declaration as I was watching the ballots in another Count so had to run across the hall to get on stage and discover I had got 150 votes and finished stone bonking last.
You still have to do all the paperwork of nominations but the expenses return was very easy.
I mentioned to my wife that a lot of paper Reform and Green candidates were likely to be elected as councillors in May and she said the very existence of paper candidates was the clearest indicator of the bankruptcy of FPTP as an electoral system.
Much as I've criticised FPTP over the years it was interesting what a vehement reaction she had against it, when I'm used to it as just one of those things that is inevitable in FPTP.
This is the best news for Unionists in many a year.
George Galloway U-turns on Scottish independence for 2026 elections
POLITICAL firebrand George Galloway has U-turned on his opposition to Scottish independence, saying the “British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt”.
In comments posted on Facebook but delivered as a speech to Workers Party Scotland members, Galloway said he had changed his opinion and “if God spares me, I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom”.
In the 2021 Holyrood elections, Galloway stood for the “All for Unity” campaign and pledged to “tackle the scourge of separatism”. He said he would vote Conservative in a bid to court Unionist voters, but his campaign group ultimately failed to win any seats...
...The former Labour politician is now standing for Workers Party Scotland in the 2026 Holyrood elections in Glasgow Southside. He is also second on the party’s Glasgow regional list, behind lead candidate Yvonne Ridley.
Ahead of a campaign launch event in Govan on Friday, March 27, Galloway said his party would support a push for a second independence referendum – and that he personally would campaign for a Yes vote.
“We go into the coming elections for Holyrood in May, behind our lead candidate Yvonne Ridley, wholly committed to a second referendum on the issue of Scottish independence,” he said.
“We demand that the votes of all pro-referendum parties in this election be counted as the stated will of the Scottish public. In other words these elections must be explicitly called a referendum on a referendum.”
Galloway went on: “Now the question inevitably arises: if we get the referendum how will you vote? For which side will you campaign?
“Well the party’s position at this moment is that this remains hypothetical. Let’s win the referendum argument and then decide. I understand this and don’t seek to railroad my colleagues in any way. Unlike our rivals the so-called ‘Labour’ party we are a democratic organisation and the members will decide.
“But as a born and bred Scot with some history in this country I feel obligated to make my own personal position clear.
“As Marx (Groucho) said: ‘When the facts change, so do my opinions.’
“As a former opponent of independence I have changed my opinion. I will support Scottish independence at the next referendum.
“If God spares me I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom. The time has come for unity and independence in Ireland and independence for Scotland and Wales.
“The British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt for reasons I have adumbrated so many times on screen and in print and will continue to do.”
This is the best news for Unionists in many a year.
George Galloway U-turns on Scottish independence for 2026 elections
POLITICAL firebrand George Galloway has U-turned on his opposition to Scottish independence, saying the “British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt”.
In comments posted on Facebook but delivered as a speech to Workers Party Scotland members, Galloway said he had changed his opinion and “if God spares me, I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom”.
In the 2021 Holyrood elections, Galloway stood for the “All for Unity” campaign and pledged to “tackle the scourge of separatism”. He said he would vote Conservative in a bid to court Unionist voters, but his campaign group ultimately failed to win any seats...
...The former Labour politician is now standing for Workers Party Scotland in the 2026 Holyrood elections in Glasgow Southside. He is also second on the party’s Glasgow regional list, behind lead candidate Yvonne Ridley.
Ahead of a campaign launch event in Govan on Friday, March 27, Galloway said his party would support a push for a second independence referendum – and that he personally would campaign for a Yes vote.
“We go into the coming elections for Holyrood in May, behind our lead candidate Yvonne Ridley, wholly committed to a second referendum on the issue of Scottish independence,” he said.
“We demand that the votes of all pro-referendum parties in this election be counted as the stated will of the Scottish public. In other words these elections must be explicitly called a referendum on a referendum.”
Galloway went on: “Now the question inevitably arises: if we get the referendum how will you vote? For which side will you campaign?
“Well the party’s position at this moment is that this remains hypothetical. Let’s win the referendum argument and then decide. I understand this and don’t seek to railroad my colleagues in any way. Unlike our rivals the so-called ‘Labour’ party we are a democratic organisation and the members will decide.
“But as a born and bred Scot with some history in this country I feel obligated to make my own personal position clear.
“As Marx (Groucho) said: ‘When the facts change, so do my opinions.’
“As a former opponent of independence I have changed my opinion. I will support Scottish independence at the next referendum.
“If God spares me I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom. The time has come for unity and independence in Ireland and independence for Scotland and Wales.
“The British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt for reasons I have adumbrated so many times on screen and in print and will continue to do.”
Fair to say this dude is not OVER-optimistic about the Iran War sequelae
"Risible - and frighteningly woolly thinking for a Hudson Institute scholar. Repeat after me: the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is NOT the deterrent. The strategic aim of Iran is to stop the flow of oil through it in order to cause pain. Closure is just ONE means of doing so. THE REAL DETERRENT is the destruction of Gulf oil and gas infrastructure so that hydrocarbons do not reach the global economy IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE STRAIT IS OPEN OR NOT.
"If Iran pushes that button in response to some dumb Trump-Bibi escalation, we can expect GLOBAL depression. This in turn means mass starvation in the Third World, which in turn leads to a worldwide equivalent of the Arab Spring. In the developed world, ex-the, Russia and maybe China, it means mass unemployment, travel restrictions, mandatory WFH, and the victory for far more extreme versions of populism in Europe. It means command economies. It means aggressive, militaristic efforts to secure important national resources, and war when such efforts are disputed. It means the forced rewiring of the entire postwar civilisation. It is the final conflagration of the Fourth Turning. It is the violent sweeping away of the existing excess elites (per @Peter_Turchin)."
"A final conflagration of the Fourth Turning and the violent sweeping away of the existing excess elites"
Is this a good or a bad thing?
I've no idea!
What troubles me is that this guy is relatively sensible, IIRC. Not normally given to hysterics. Angry but not sensationalist
Also there are several people talking this way. That we are heading into the most tremendous emergency, worldwide
I find it hard to belive. But I fear that, despite everything, I may have some Normalcy Bias going on
It's very worrying and I am worried. About 2 things. Economic and financial collapse. A nuclear war.
Apart from that, all cool here.
Yep, that's roughly where I am. Still, tomorrow I'm going to Whitstable, so it's swings and roundabouts
I cooked a delicious pizza today and I'm reading a rather entertaining book called, "Gifted & Talented" by Olivie Blake (fairly certain that's not a pseudonym of you know who).
I've managed to accumulate nine books on loan from the library, so a nuclear apocalypse would be a rather irritating interruption to my reading.
I don't know if anyone on here is a Reform member or activist.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
We started off with the noble intention that everyone should be a proper candidate. With a commitment to campaigning, and all that sort of thing. But as there weren't 90 coming forward, barrels had to be scraped, and paper candidates such as yours truly will be appearing in no-hope wards.
Yeah, I've played that game. A long day in a target Ward then off to the Count where you don't look at the votes in your own patch but are watching what's happening in the important Wards.
One time, I almost missed my own declaration as I was watching the ballots in another Count so had to run across the hall to get on stage and discover I had got 150 votes and finished stone bonking last.
You still have to do all the paperwork of nominations but the expenses return was very easy.
I mentioned to my wife that a lot of paper Reform and Green candidates were likely to be elected as councillors in May and she said the very existence of paper candidates was the clearest indicator of the bankruptcy of FPTP as an electoral system.
Much as I've criticised FPTP over the years it was interesting what a vehement reaction she had against it, when I'm used to it as just one of those things that is inevitable in FPTP.
Mrs Password isn't entirely wrong. The reality is most parties have finite resources in terms of activists and have to put them where they can be most effective. There's a view probably in all parties you shouldn't stand in a seat you aren't going to try and win and I understand that but the counter-argument is those who want to vote for the party should have the opportunity so to do and not to be forced to either abstain or vote tactically because the party for whom they would like to vote isn't represented on the ballot.
If we purport to be in a plural democracy where many voices and opinions are to be encouraged, it seems wrong not to have that on of all things a ballot paper.
I probably won't have a Lib Dem candidate on the ballot paper in my Ward so I will have to decide what to do with my three votes.
This is the best news for Unionists in many a year.
George Galloway U-turns on Scottish independence for 2026 elections
POLITICAL firebrand George Galloway has U-turned on his opposition to Scottish independence, saying the “British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt”.
In comments posted on Facebook but delivered as a speech to Workers Party Scotland members, Galloway said he had changed his opinion and “if God spares me, I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom”.
In the 2021 Holyrood elections, Galloway stood for the “All for Unity” campaign and pledged to “tackle the scourge of separatism”. He said he would vote Conservative in a bid to court Unionist voters, but his campaign group ultimately failed to win any seats...
...The former Labour politician is now standing for Workers Party Scotland in the 2026 Holyrood elections in Glasgow Southside. He is also second on the party’s Glasgow regional list, behind lead candidate Yvonne Ridley.
Ahead of a campaign launch event in Govan on Friday, March 27, Galloway said his party would support a push for a second independence referendum – and that he personally would campaign for a Yes vote.
“We go into the coming elections for Holyrood in May, behind our lead candidate Yvonne Ridley, wholly committed to a second referendum on the issue of Scottish independence,” he said.
“We demand that the votes of all pro-referendum parties in this election be counted as the stated will of the Scottish public. In other words these elections must be explicitly called a referendum on a referendum.”
Galloway went on: “Now the question inevitably arises: if we get the referendum how will you vote? For which side will you campaign?
“Well the party’s position at this moment is that this remains hypothetical. Let’s win the referendum argument and then decide. I understand this and don’t seek to railroad my colleagues in any way. Unlike our rivals the so-called ‘Labour’ party we are a democratic organisation and the members will decide.
“But as a born and bred Scot with some history in this country I feel obligated to make my own personal position clear.
“As Marx (Groucho) said: ‘When the facts change, so do my opinions.’
“As a former opponent of independence I have changed my opinion. I will support Scottish independence at the next referendum.
“If God spares me I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom. The time has come for unity and independence in Ireland and independence for Scotland and Wales.
“The British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt for reasons I have adumbrated so many times on screen and in print and will continue to do.”
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
China has been an Empire for ages and Empires do heinous things to enforce Imperial hegemony over their reluctant subjects, as critics of the shorter-lived British Empire are wont to point out (me included). I think there's essentially only been about a century when China wasn't imposing Imperial control, in more than two millennia of its history.
To say that China was, "more sinned against than sinning," is such an incuriously Eurocentric view of history.
We should all should aspire to a restlessly curious nothing-centric view of history, LP. With you there. I will try and up my game.
Tom Nuttall @tom_nuttall · 2h It looks like the CDU have ejected the SPD in Rhineland-Palatinate, in the second of this year's five state elections in Germany. And I think this is the best-ever result for the AfD in western Germany.
This is the best news for Unionists in many a year.
George Galloway U-turns on Scottish independence for 2026 elections
POLITICAL firebrand George Galloway has U-turned on his opposition to Scottish independence, saying the “British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt”.
In comments posted on Facebook but delivered as a speech to Workers Party Scotland members, Galloway said he had changed his opinion and “if God spares me, I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom”.
In the 2021 Holyrood elections, Galloway stood for the “All for Unity” campaign and pledged to “tackle the scourge of separatism”. He said he would vote Conservative in a bid to court Unionist voters, but his campaign group ultimately failed to win any seats...
...The former Labour politician is now standing for Workers Party Scotland in the 2026 Holyrood elections in Glasgow Southside. He is also second on the party’s Glasgow regional list, behind lead candidate Yvonne Ridley.
Ahead of a campaign launch event in Govan on Friday, March 27, Galloway said his party would support a push for a second independence referendum – and that he personally would campaign for a Yes vote.
“We go into the coming elections for Holyrood in May, behind our lead candidate Yvonne Ridley, wholly committed to a second referendum on the issue of Scottish independence,” he said.
“We demand that the votes of all pro-referendum parties in this election be counted as the stated will of the Scottish public. In other words these elections must be explicitly called a referendum on a referendum.”
Galloway went on: “Now the question inevitably arises: if we get the referendum how will you vote? For which side will you campaign?
“Well the party’s position at this moment is that this remains hypothetical. Let’s win the referendum argument and then decide. I understand this and don’t seek to railroad my colleagues in any way. Unlike our rivals the so-called ‘Labour’ party we are a democratic organisation and the members will decide.
“But as a born and bred Scot with some history in this country I feel obligated to make my own personal position clear.
“As Marx (Groucho) said: ‘When the facts change, so do my opinions.’
“As a former opponent of independence I have changed my opinion. I will support Scottish independence at the next referendum.
“If God spares me I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom. The time has come for unity and independence in Ireland and independence for Scotland and Wales.
“The British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt for reasons I have adumbrated so many times on screen and in print and will continue to do.”
In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria
It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.
What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this
If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity
In China? Meh. TThey shrug
More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.
This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known
eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently
"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]
The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."
I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm
However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree
China has been an Empire for ages and Empires do heinous things to enforce Imperial hegemony over their reluctant subjects, as critics of the shorter-lived British Empire are wont to point out (me included). I think there's essentially only been about a century when China wasn't imposing Imperial control, in more than two millennia of its history.
To say that China was, "more sinned against than sinning," is such an incuriously Eurocentric view of history.
We should all should aspire to a restlessly curious nothing-centric view of history, LP. With you there. I will try and up my game.
The China centric view might be that their geography is a significant factor ?
We mentioned famines and cannibalism upthread. That's a recurrent feature of their history. Irrigation on a massive scale allowed extremely large populations (by the standards of the time) to be supported, but when that failed, millions died.
Maintaining that system required order - historically, famines seem as likely to have been manmade, when that broke down from either war or large scale banditry, as they were from climate conditions.
The areas of rich production also made very tempting targets for less well endowed regions.
Put that all together and you have a highly repressive social order, punctuated by times of huge and deadly disorder.
That's a highly simplistic description, but it's undeniably a quite different dynamic to early western societies.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
All this Trump unhinged is all very well.....but what would you be saying if the loony religious leaders in Iran attacked the West/Israel with Nuclear weapons. You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
I don't believe you will find a post where I have cheered on the Mullahs. I would love to see regime change and if it were possible a secular democracy. That said, Obama had a perfectly reasonable deal with Iran which limited their nuclear programmes and precluded them from producing weaponry. Trump 45 tore that up.
Bibi has been pleading with US Presidents on and off since 1996 to attack Tehran because the Mullahs are a mere 5 minutes away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Every President to Trump 47 has chosen to steer well clear of the quagmire we now find ourselves in the midst of. Trump 45 knew it was folly, but Trump 47 needed to bury the Epstein files. Go figure.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
All this Trump unhinged is all very well.....but what would you be saying if the loony religious leaders in Iran attacked the West/Israel with Nuclear weapons. You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
I don't believe you will find a post where I have cheered on the Mullahs. I would love to see regime change and if it were possible a secular democracy. That said, Obama had a perfectly reasonable deal with Iran which limited their nuclear programmes and precluded them from producing weaponry. Trump 45 tore that up.
Bibi has been pleading with US Presidents on and off since 1996 to attack Tehran because the Mullahs are a mere 5 minutes away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Every President to Trump 47 has chosen to steer well clear of the quagmire we now find ourselves in the midst of. Trump 45 knew it was folly, but Trump 47 needed to bury the Epstein files. Go figure.
Quite. The US already dealt out serious damage to Iran's nuclear ambitions. There was no immediate need for this attack if preventing bomb development was the aim (and that's far from clear). And the attack was launched in the middle of nuclear negotiations.
Against that, Trump and Netanyahu are taking enormous risks for the world economy, in return for an outcome which is highly uncertain.
The Iranians say they didn't fire at Diego Garcia.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
Seems a bit improbable to put it mildly. The Israelis do have submarines that can launch short range ballistic missiles but there seems no obvious reason to shoot them at Diego Garcia when given their nature would be very obvious indeed who fired them.
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are increasing their purchases of mortgage-backed securities to stabilize a volatile market with widening bond spreads. This move follows President Trump's directive to buy $200 billion in MBS to enhance housing affordability amid rising mortgage rates. The increased buying may help mitigate some market pressures caused by the US-Iran conflict, which has led to higher borrowing costs. Fannie and Freddie's retained portfolios have grown significantly, reaching $278 billion as of January, despite a substantial decline since 2008.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
All this Trump unhinged is all very well.....but what would you be saying if the loony religious leaders in Iran attacked the West/Israel with Nuclear weapons. You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
I don't believe you will find a post where I have cheered on the Mullahs. I would love to see regime change and if it were possible a secular democracy. That said, Obama had a perfectly reasonable deal with Iran which limited their nuclear programmes and precluded them from producing weaponry. Trump 45 tore that up.
Bibi has been pleading with US Presidents on and off since 1996 to attack Tehran because the Mullahs are a mere 5 minutes away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Every President to Trump 47 has chosen to steer well clear of the quagmire we now find ourselves in the midst of. Trump 45 knew it was folly, but Trump 47 needed to bury the Epstein files. Go figure.
Quite. The US already dealt out serious damage to Iran's nuclear ambitions. There was no immediate need for this attack if preventing bomb development was the aim (and that's far from clear). And the attack was launched in the middle of nuclear negotiations.
Against that, Trump and Netanyahu are taking enormous risks for the world economy, in return for an outcome which is highly uncertain.
I sometimes wonder if Trump is on a commission from Russia to f*** up the World order in their favour.
Afternoon all. Was taking a look at the Reform polling decline after last nights Opinium. They were last as low as 27 with them straddling the 2025 LEs (only a couple of 29s since, all others 30 plus) and were at 27 with them as far back as Jan 2025. The same goes for YouGov and Find Out Now - back to pre LE 2025 levels.with other pollsters they are running a point to two points above the run in to 2025 LEs. The point i think that will prove crucial is that they are hitting these levels on a sharpish downward trajectory and not the sharp upward one early 2025 saw. This suggests at least the possibility of an undershoot versus expectations. Im of the opinion as we stand that this will show itself in a very poor Holyrood showing (possibly even falling below the Tories, LDs or Greens in seats, very probably below Labour), a poor London result, perhaps 4th in wards won and no more than 1 or 2 councils and failing to come first in Wales. Then id take a look at thr 73 seats they are defending - how many of them are lost?
The polls may turn of course and they have the virtual standing start premium of lots of gains but the potential for narrative shift exists
As you say though in most polls Reform are polling about as well as before the LE2025, they are about tied in Wales for the lead, likely to win the most or second most list seats at Holyrood and make gains in outer London suburbs. We are a long way yet from saying Reform are in real decline
Doing 30 braking versus doing 30 accelerating.
Unless heavy tactical anti Reform votes this year though Reform will likely see similar gains, especially in the country council and redwall large town and northern and Midlands cities voting and in Wales
I am not so sure about Farage in Wales as I once was. Yes, we love the racism and misogyny, but has the gloss been taken off by Nathan Gill and Farage's recent assertion that Welsh is a foreign language and Welsh language speakers who don't want to speak English can f*** off from where their ancestors came from in 800 AD and earlier. Eight hundred AD some years, it is worth mentioning is before the Huguenot Farage's ancestors left France.it is worth mentioning
Latest Welsh poll earlier this month still has Reform joint top on 26% with Plaid, with Labour third on 20%, followed by the Tories and Greens tied on 10%
Not long ago I feared Reform would walk it. Plaid with Labour is probable now.
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
The question really is, is this country more anti or pro Reform.
I am hoping Trump's unhinged war and Nigel's well known Trump adjacency might damage him. I am sure being unable to procure petrol is more important to the man cutting up the Clapham Omnibus. than hating people who aren't white.
All this Trump unhinged is all very well.....but what would you be saying if the loony religious leaders in Iran attacked the West/Israel with Nuclear weapons. You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
I don't believe you will find a post where I have cheered on the Mullahs. I would love to see regime change and if it were possible a secular democracy. That said, Obama had a perfectly reasonable deal with Iran which limited their nuclear programmes and precluded them from producing weaponry. Trump 45 tore that up.
Bibi has been pleading with US Presidents on and off since 1996 to attack Tehran because the Mullahs are a mere 5 minutes away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Every President to Trump 47 has chosen to steer well clear of the quagmire we now find ourselves in the midst of. Trump 45 knew it was folly, but Trump 47 needed to bury the Epstein files. Go figure.
Quite. The US already dealt out serious damage to Iran's nuclear ambitions. There was no immediate need for this attack if preventing bomb development was the aim (and that's far from clear). And the attack was launched in the middle of nuclear negotiations.
Against that, Trump and Netanyahu are taking enormous risks for the world economy, in return for an outcome which is highly uncertain.
I sometimes wonder if Trump is on a commission from Russia to f*** up the World order in their favour.
Why would they pay him a commission? The blackmail material they have is likely ample.
"You have the watches, we have the time" as the Taliban apparently used to say about the US.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 2h But Iran has weathered long periods of ultra-low oil exports. Back in 2020-22, Iran endured American "maximum pressure" on its petroleum industry, with exports at times down 90% from today's levels. And Iran didn't buckle then. Thus, it's unlikely to do so now.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 2h Unlike the Islamic Republic, Trump doesn’t have the benefit of time. He needs to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in days or, at most, weeks or oil prices would rally. He doesn’t have months to crank up the pressure on Iran via Kharg to accept a deal. Time favours Tehran.
Israel have been such C words during this entire Iran incursion
I'd differentiate between Israel and Bibi's disgusting war criminal regime. Netanyahu, Ben Gvir and Smotrich are indeed ***** (rhymes with Cambridge punts).
"You have the watches, we have the time" as the Taliban apparently used to say about the US.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 2h But Iran has weathered long periods of ultra-low oil exports. Back in 2020-22, Iran endured American "maximum pressure" on its petroleum industry, with exports at times down 90% from today's levels. And Iran didn't buckle then. Thus, it's unlikely to do so now.
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 2h Unlike the Islamic Republic, Trump doesn’t have the benefit of time. He needs to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in days or, at most, weeks or oil prices would rally. He doesn’t have months to crank up the pressure on Iran via Kharg to accept a deal. Time favours Tehran.
Something I haven’t heard anything about is that at least up to ten years ago Iran held huge amounts of Venezuelan gov bonds and cash. I don’t know if they still do but will be interesting if that causes any tensions or has any impact on any sides.
Comments
"Now I am become Death. Destroyer of wolds..."
He lasted 11 days, which has become an acknowledged time-unit. Liz Truss, for instance, lasted fewer than 5 Scaramuccis at No 10.
Spurs. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
Heh.
His comment was that the states in the region might well buy nukes, if Iran gets the bomb. From the Israelis.
https://www.aberdeenmedals.com/shop.php?code=21262
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3KYUNJu6yM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Mutual_Defence_Agreement
His other comment is that high UK energy prices are killing off the manufacturing around Aberdeen - a bunch of small companies making high quality equipment for oil related stuff there. Even without the North Sea, they stood a chance - good reputation in the business. But 'leecy prices that are x times those in other countries is killing them.
https://www.petrolprices.com/app/map?fuelType=2&brandType=0&resultLimit=0&offset=0&sortType=price&lat=50.3714122&lng=-4.1424451&z=10&d=5
Like farmers they bleat but don't help themselves. Especially the supermarkets that serve wide rural area and A road stations
Let me explain the sinister nature of what Trump actually does to people.
He asks: are you loyal to me?
Yes.
Good. No forever wars. Are you with me?
Yes. No forever wars.
Then he starts the wars. And now he needs you to be with him on the wars too.
And then the Epstein files come out. Allegations involving children. And he needs you to look the other way on that too.
That’s the mechanism. That’s how it works.
He moves the goalposts incrementally. Each ask is slightly more compromising than the last.
And by the time you realize how far you’ve traveled from your own principles you are so deep in that you can’t find your way back.
Loyalty to Trump doesn’t mean loyalty to an idea or a policy or a vision for the country.
It means asymmetric, unconditional, no-questions-asked loyalty to whatever he decides is true today.
You have to understand the sinister nature of that to understand what is really happening in Washington right now.
This isn’t politics. This is a loyalty trap.
https://x.com/Scaramucci/status/2035778682707742758
So you will see a very uneven pattern in rising prices. For a while.
"MAGA is me. MAGA is what I say it is."
On the fuel price monitor, the news from Barking is 141.9p per litre for common 10% ethanol unleaded and 166.9p for Diesel.
Closest CostCo says 136p (Derby). Diesel 150p
Yesterday the Jet Garage was 9p a litre cheaper for Petrol and 11p cheaper for Diesel...
I used to like Rate my takeaway until they all fell out.
I'm curious to know how local election candidates are being chosen - do the members have any say or is it all imposed from above i.e: Zia Yusuf or similar?
I ask because I've heard of a couple of examples in London where former Conservative Councillors who have defected to Reform have been told they aren't fighting the Ward in which they were a representative but some other Ward which seems odd
To broaden it out, is it normal practice for a defecting Councillor to fight their own patch under their new colours in other parties or do they get sent to another area as, what, penance for defecting?
When I was a Liberal and LD activist back in the Renaissance, there was always a selection process for the target Wards but for the non target areas, anyone who wanted to be a paper candidate could be such (I was on a few occasions). The only caveat was if you did win as a paper candidate you had to agree to serve as a Councillor. Mercifully, the good burghers never inflicted me on themselves - as clear an act of self-harm as could be imagined.
The other side of this nowadays is vetting - social media - which didn't happen in my day. If you had defaced a parchment or killed one of the King's Deer, it was generally best to admit it upfront.
I'm really quite surprised to see you amongst the apparently cheapskate reactionaries.
It is time to ban PornHub
The site appears not to care one bit for our laws or for the safety and rights of women and children
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/03/22/it-is-time-to-ban-pornhub/?recomm_id=c025c726-3507-47d6-819c-6f710f85d24b
PS - What is this PornHub they talk about?
https://x.com/mb_ghalibaf/status/2035776169656676675
Alongside military bases, those financial entities that finance the US military budget are legitimate targets. US treasury bonds are soaked in Iranians' blood. Purchase them, and you purchase a strike on your HQ and assets.
We monitor your portfolios. This is your final notice.
Petrol would be cheaper than diesel but putting it in my car might prove to be a false economy…
The Kobeissi Letter
@KobeissiLetter
US stock market futures open in 4 hours:
...
Brace for volatility at the open.
https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2035782635725914595
Not that I’ve seen that many !
Brilliant to see
(If you're lucky you can hit "reader mode" on your browser and read it through the paywall).
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are increasing their purchases of mortgage-backed securities to stabilize a volatile market with widening bond spreads.
This move follows President Trump's directive to buy $200 billion in MBS to enhance housing affordability amid rising mortgage rates.
The increased buying may help mitigate some market pressures caused by the US-Iran conflict, which has led to higher borrowing costs.
Fannie and Freddie's retained portfolios have grown significantly, reaching $278 billion as of January, despite a substantial decline since 2008.
http://fxleaders.com/news/2026/03/22/fannie-freddie-ramp-up-large-mbs-bids-in-push-to-lower-mortgage-rates/
Every party needs to blame Trump for his vanity war and the reason fuel is unavailable and expensive, and that over here, Trump's little helper is a sweary man called Nigel.
One time, I almost missed my own declaration as I was watching the ballots in another Count so had to run across the hall to get on stage and discover I had got 150 votes and finished stone bonking last.
You still have to do all the paperwork of nominations but the expenses return was very easy.
You would be the first to scream about the US not taking proactive action.
George Galloway U-turns on Scottish independence for 2026 elections
POLITICAL firebrand George Galloway has U-turned on his opposition to Scottish independence, saying the “British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt”.
In comments posted on Facebook but delivered as a speech to Workers Party Scotland members, Galloway said he had changed his opinion and “if God spares me, I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom”.
In the 2021 Holyrood elections, Galloway stood for the “All for Unity” campaign and pledged to “tackle the scourge of separatism”. He said he would vote Conservative in a bid to court Unionist voters, but his campaign group ultimately failed to win any seats...
...The former Labour politician is now standing for Workers Party Scotland in the 2026 Holyrood elections in Glasgow Southside. He is also second on the party’s Glasgow regional list, behind lead candidate Yvonne Ridley.
Ahead of a campaign launch event in Govan on Friday, March 27, Galloway said his party would support a push for a second independence referendum – and that he personally would campaign for a Yes vote.
“We go into the coming elections for Holyrood in May, behind our lead candidate Yvonne Ridley, wholly committed to a second referendum on the issue of Scottish independence,” he said.
“We demand that the votes of all pro-referendum parties in this election be counted as the stated will of the Scottish public. In other words these elections must be explicitly called a referendum on a referendum.”
Galloway went on: “Now the question inevitably arises: if we get the referendum how will you vote? For which side will you campaign?
“Well the party’s position at this moment is that this remains hypothetical. Let’s win the referendum argument and then decide. I understand this and don’t seek to railroad my colleagues in any way. Unlike our rivals the so-called ‘Labour’ party we are a democratic organisation and the members will decide.
“But as a born and bred Scot with some history in this country I feel obligated to make my own personal position clear.
“As Marx (Groucho) said: ‘When the facts change, so do my opinions.’
“As a former opponent of independence I have changed my opinion. I will support Scottish independence at the next referendum.
“If God spares me I will campaign and vote for the end of the United Kingdom. The time has come for unity and independence in Ireland and independence for Scotland and Wales.
“The British state is financially, politically, and morally bankrupt for reasons I have adumbrated so many times on screen and in print and will continue to do.”
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25957698.george-galloway-u-turns-scottish-independence-2026-elections/
In any future threads about George Galloway I will be describing him as a Scottish nationalist.
"You have the watches, we have the time" as the Taliban apparently used to say about the US.
Javier Blas
@JavierBlas
·
2h
But Iran has weathered long periods of ultra-low oil exports. Back in 2020-22, Iran endured American "maximum pressure" on its petroleum industry, with exports at times down 90% from today's levels. And Iran didn't buckle then. Thus, it's unlikely to do so now.
Javier Blas
@JavierBlas
·
2h
Unlike the Islamic Republic, Trump doesn’t have the benefit of time. He needs to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in days or, at most, weeks or oil prices would rally. He doesn’t have months to crank up the pressure on Iran via Kharg to accept a deal. Time favours Tehran.
🧵10/10
https://x.com/JavierBlas/status/2035764762294747449
To say that China was, "more sinned against than sinning," is such an incuriously Eurocentric view of history.
Much as I've criticised FPTP over the years it was interesting what a vehement reaction she had against it, when I'm used to it as just one of those things that is inevitable in FPTP.
I've managed to accumulate nine books on loan from the library, so a nuclear apocalypse would be a rather irritating interruption to my reading.
If we purport to be in a plural democracy where many voices and opinions are to be encouraged, it seems wrong not to have that on of all things a ballot paper.
I probably won't have a Lib Dem candidate on the ballot paper in my Ward so I will have to decide what to do with my three votes.
Tom Nuttall
@tom_nuttall
·
2h
It looks like the CDU have ejected the SPD in Rhineland-Palatinate, in the second of this year's five state elections in Germany. And I think this is the best-ever result for the AfD in western Germany.
https://x.com/tom_nuttall/status/2035764023082328211
Tom Nuttall
@tom_nuttall
·
2h
Early projections suggest the AfD won the vote among under-25s, albeit by a tiny margin in a fragmented field.
We mentioned famines and cannibalism upthread. That's a recurrent feature of their history.
Irrigation on a massive scale allowed extremely large populations (by the standards of the time) to be supported, but when that failed, millions died.
Maintaining that system required order - historically, famines seem as likely to have been manmade, when that broke down from either war or large scale banditry, as they were from climate conditions.
The areas of rich production also made very tempting targets for less well endowed regions.
Put that all together and you have a highly repressive social order, punctuated by times of huge and deadly disorder.
That's a highly simplistic description, but it's undeniably a quite different dynamic to early western societies.
That said, Obama had a perfectly reasonable deal with Iran which limited their nuclear programmes and precluded them from producing weaponry. Trump 45 tore that up.
Bibi has been pleading with US Presidents on and off since 1996 to attack Tehran because the Mullahs are a mere 5 minutes away from acquiring nuclear weapons. Every President to Trump 47 has chosen to steer well clear of the quagmire we now find ourselves in the midst of. Trump 45 knew it was folly, but Trump 47 needed to bury the Epstein files. Go figure.
The rumour on TwiX is they were fired from an Israeli submarine
The US already dealt out serious damage to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
There was no immediate need for this attack if preventing bomb development was the aim (and that's far from clear). And the attack was launched in the middle of nuclear negotiations.
Against that, Trump and Netanyahu are taking enormous risks for the world economy, in return for an outcome which is highly uncertain.
Gates open on border for music festival massacre
9/11 Mossad Agents in vicinity
More likely either the Iranians are lying or, disturbing thought, it was the Russians.
And of course, a near certainty that Twitter is talking BS,
They should have been consigned to the rubbish bin like Lehmans
And by whom.
Be astonished if the CIA don't know.
Be surprised if 5 Eyes don't.