If the Iranians capture that airman and parade him in Tehran, then say he is being held at an undisclosed military compound "do you want to risk bombing him, Trump? At that point Trump has his own Carter problem with Iran.
THEN watch his popularity plummet.
Ready when you are Mr De Milne.....I think you might be too late
The response to events in Clapham earlier in the week and to the comments of the M&S retail director, one Thinus Keeve, only show how little actual serious response there is to all of this.
The truth was this was an organised group (mob if you like) of several dozen young people who swept down Clapham High Street and terrorised a number of shops. This was clearly organised and orchestrated by social media and the Police response, as shown on CCTV, looked what it was - inadequate.
For all the moaning about Sadiq Khan, no force could mobilise the numbers required that quickly.
Oddly enough, there are plenty of people decrying the end of the "Internet" as a forum for free speech and expression in a period of tightening Government control and legislation yet only supervision (even if it were possible) could have prevented what happened.
The other side of this are the addicts in East Ham High Street who routinely go into shops and steal food and drink. We are told staff in the stores have strict instructions to basically let it happen (much like TfL staff). There are aspects of that which need challenging and a debate about how much we should allow or encourage intervention by staff (only properly trained staff naturally). Tesco can afford to lose a tin of beans and a bottle of whisky while TfL can cope with the odd evader but at what point does it become endemic and if and when it does how do we or ought we to respond?
Dealing with a couple of desperate individuals is one thing - dealing with a mob of dozens something entirely different.
On the other side, there's the wider issue about the security and surveillance State and the degree to which, for example, Government monitoring of social media is acceptable or desirable in terms of crime prevention - we know it is used as a counter terrorist mechanism for example.
With this sort of unrestricted criminality, we see a society descending towards Hobbes' State of Nature.
I suspect that the majority of people who want to live in a safe, law abiding environment would be happy for a bit more state surveillance if it could put an end to the problem.
A correction will appear in tomorrow's print edition: "A headline with an article on Friday about President Trump’s threats to leave NATO misstated the full name of the body. It is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, not the North American Treaty Organization." https://x.com/NYTimesPR/status/2040142477215056082
The headline and premise of the article: “A North American Treaty Organization without America?”
I'll never forget the aid that came to Britain when Argentina attacked NATO territory. God bless those brave American soldiers who gave their lives and kept the Strait of Magellan open.
Morning all. Kemi has gone full defiant in the Telegrubby 'i fight on regardless of results May 7th' By (extremely amateurish) reading of Expectation Management runes, shes unlikely to want to have that as the main discussion in the aftermath so their internal expectations must be on the 'bit less terrible than predicted' side of the see saw. What they get is a different matter of course
The more I hear former Prime Ministers lining up to say they'd be joining in with Trump's folly, the more credit Starmer deserves for keeping us out of it.
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
I've missed out on this marmalade thing. Could someone (e) recap?
But I only like the cheapest most rubbishy stuff. Homemade is lost on me, rather not have any.
Different countries have a word like “marmalade”, but mean somewhat different things by it. To ensure free trade, the EU, when the UK was in it, agreed some standards around what the word “marmalade” on a label should mean. These standards aligned with the British usage of the word.
We then left the EU. Without having to accommodate us, the EU then changed its marmalade labelling rules to suit other countries’ usages.
The UK wants to continue trading with the EU, so we’ve signed up to a bunch of food trade rules, including this new marmalade one. That means that we now have to adjust our labelling to match the EU’s new rules. This will mean that what used to be labelled as “marmalade” in the UK will now have to be labelled “citrus marmalade” or similar.
This, some suggest, is emblematic of the problem of Brexit. In the EU, we got to influence the rules. Outside the EU, we still need to trade, but just have to accept the EU’s rules.
That doesn't explain/justify why purely domestic products should follow the EU rules, though. Or would products made solely for the UK use the term properly rather than the EU way?
[NB I don't really care about marmalade, but I'm not sure if this is a blanket change or only for EU exports, the latter of which being totally fine].
Free circulation of goods, which is the government's aim to reduce costly cross border compliance, requires a single set of rules. These rules are dictated by the EU, now with no input from the UK. Previously the UK insisted on marmalade being marmalade but this was changed after Brexit.
Not a big deal in herself but illustrative of the Brexit sovereignty outcome.
On the other hand, we've been able (aided by good stances on both sides of the political aisle) to give to Ukraine without having to appease the likes of Hungary and Slovakia into agreeing. I believe those two countries are threatening to hold up the latest funds/military gear for Ukraine.
Exactly as individual EU members do. What's being held up is the EU loan.
It will be interesting to watch how that one plays out.
Unless he can organise some industrial scale vote-rigging in the next week, it's looking like Orban will be out on his arse by April 13.
He could ask his friends Donald and Vladimir for advice.
I think he's finding that their endorsements are not quite as valuable as he might have originally thought.
Morning all. Kemi has gone full defiant in the Telegrubby 'i fight on regardless of results May 7th' By (extremely amateurish) reading of Expectation Management runes, shes unlikely to want to have that as the main discussion in the aftermath so their internal expectations must be on the 'bit less terrible than predicted' side of the see saw. What they get is a different matter of course
She may just get away with it. On the grounds that Labour will be more catastrophic.
But some of that also stems from the fact they know that even if they detain the shoplifter and hand the over to the police, the chance of any meaningful prosecution is zero. Why risk your employees catching the criminals when the police or courts will just let them go?
The justice system in the UK has no mechanism for dealing with serial petty offenders, which shoplifters tend to be. There was a report in the local rag last year of a woman who got caught stealing from a charity shop - she had over 20 previous convictions for shoplifting, but was still out and about nicking things.
To my mind no-one with 20 convictions for anything should be on the streets.
That does show that it is possible to arrest and convict shoplifters.
The problem is the punishment. Life incarceration would seem both harsh and expensive.
Good morning, everyone.
Confiscations/financial penalties might be the way to go. Doesn't cost the taxpayer anything, costs the perpetrator their widescreen TV.
Just break the buggers arms and they won't be able to nick for a few months
Why not go further and introduce sharia law?
In England and Wales (a known den of liberals) the maximum penalty for shoplifting goods worth up to £200 is imprisonment for six months; otherwise, the maximum is seven years.
For a shoplifter to get seven years, though, they must first have been tried and convicted by a jury. This is assuming they have the effrontery to plead not guilty, which currently they're still allowed to.
If you don't fancy full sharia (e.g. first time removal of left hand, second time the right hand, third time the head), maybe after the xth alleged offence the police should break x of their limbs and then chuck them out of the police station's xth floor window?
And none of this continental stuff about calling the ground floor the first floor either!
Everyone focuses on the penalty.
Yet what is both more powerful, and much cheaper to implement than lengthy prison terms, is the speed at which the process happens.
For shoplifting the whole process could be done within 24 hours. If you contest it at crown court the average wait for shoplifting is now around 400 days.
Totally agreed on the ridiculous waiting times.
But twenty-four hours is too short for a defendant to receive all the evidence against them and prepare a defence. And there should be an option for trial by jury for all offences.
Organising a jury trial doesn't have to take a year. In 1952 Derek Bentley was arrested for murder on 2 November and tried at the Old Bailey between 9 and 11 December.
I'd be inclined to permit non-criminal punishments akin to Penalty Charge Notices you get for speeding.
The accused has the right to appeal as with PCNs, but if identified the default is you pay [X] fine and have points against your name. For repeat offences you are taken to court to be criminally charged with the prospect of more severe punishments.
It means low level offenders get speedy punishment that is high enough to be painful but low enough to not warrant appealing if they're dead to rights.
just come off their benefits and we mugs pay as ever
Morning all. Kemi has gone full defiant in the Telegrubby 'i fight on regardless of results May 7th' By (extremely amateurish) reading of Expectation Management runes, shes unlikely to want to have that as the main discussion in the aftermath so their internal expectations must be on the 'bit less terrible than predicted' side of the see saw. What they get is a different matter of course
She may just get away with it. On the grounds that Labour will be more catastrophic.
Quite possibly, yes! One interesting question is if a Green blow out and Lab catastrophe sees a similar poll shift Lab Green as we saw Con Ref last May
Morning all. Kemi has gone full defiant in the Telegrubby 'i fight on regardless of results May 7th' By (extremely amateurish) reading of Expectation Management runes, shes unlikely to want to have that as the main discussion in the aftermath so their internal expectations must be on the 'bit less terrible than predicted' side of the see saw. What they get is a different matter of course
She may just get away with it. On the grounds that Labour will be more catastrophic.
Quite possibly, yes! One interesting question is if a Green blow out and Lab catastrophe sees a similar poll shift Lab Green as we saw Con Ref last May
We'll start hearing about potential Lab -> Green MP defections if that happens.
The more I hear former Prime Ministers lining up to say they'd be joining in with Trump's folly, the more credit Starmer deserves for keeping us out of it.
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
My Labour vote will be done with gusto. I'm mildly disappointed in this government but all is relative and on that score they are a towering bunch.
I've missed out on this marmalade thing. Could someone (e) recap?
But I only like the cheapest most rubbishy stuff. Homemade is lost on me, rather not have any.
Different countries have a word like “marmalade”, but mean somewhat different things by it. To ensure free trade, the EU, when the UK was in it, agreed some standards around what the word “marmalade” on a label should mean. These standards aligned with the British usage of the word.
We then left the EU. Without having to accommodate us, the EU then changed its marmalade labelling rules to suit other countries’ usages.
The UK wants to continue trading with the EU, so we’ve signed up to a bunch of food trade rules, including this new marmalade one. That means that we now have to adjust our labelling to match the EU’s new rules. This will mean that what used to be labelled as “marmalade” in the UK will now have to be labelled “citrus marmalade” or similar.
This, some suggest, is emblematic of the problem of Brexit. In the EU, we got to influence the rules. Outside the EU, we still need to trade, but just have to accept the EU’s rules.
That doesn't explain/justify why purely domestic products should follow the EU rules, though. Or would products made solely for the UK use the term properly rather than the EU way?
[NB I don't really care about marmalade, but I'm not sure if this is a blanket change or only for EU exports, the latter of which being totally fine].
Free circulation of goods, which is the government's aim to reduce costly cross border compliance, requires a single set of rules. These rules are dictated by the EU, now with no input from the UK. Previously the UK insisted on marmalade being marmalade but this was changed after Brexit.
Not a big deal in herself but illustrative of the Brexit sovereignty outcome.
On the other hand, we've been able (aided by good stances on both sides of the political aisle) to give to Ukraine without having to appease the likes of Hungary and Slovakia into agreeing. I believe those two countries are threatening to hold up the latest funds/military gear for Ukraine.
Exactly as individual EU members do. What's being held up is the EU loan.
It will be interesting to watch how that one plays out.
Unless he can organise some industrial scale vote-rigging in the next week, it's looking like Orban will be out on his arse by April 13.
He could ask his friends Donald and Vladimir for advice.
I think he's finding that their endorsements are not quite as valuable as he might have originally thought.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
The more I hear former Prime Ministers lining up to say they'd be joining in with Trump's folly, the more credit Starmer deserves for keeping us out of it.
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
My Labour vote will be done with gusto. I'm mildly disappointed in this government but all is relative and on that score they are a towering bunch.
The response to events in Clapham earlier in the week and to the comments of the M&S retail director, one Thinus Keeve, only show how little actual serious response there is to all of this.
The truth was this was an organised group (mob if you like) of several dozen young people who swept down Clapham High Street and terrorised a number of shops. This was clearly organised and orchestrated by social media and the Police response, as shown on CCTV, looked what it was - inadequate.
For all the moaning about Sadiq Khan, no force could mobilise the numbers required that quickly.
Oddly enough, there are plenty of people decrying the end of the "Internet" as a forum for free speech and expression in a period of tightening Government control and legislation yet only supervision (even if it were possible) could have prevented what happened.
The other side of this are the addicts in East Ham High Street who routinely go into shops and steal food and drink. We are told staff in the stores have strict instructions to basically let it happen (much like TfL staff). There are aspects of that which need challenging and a debate about how much we should allow or encourage intervention by staff (only properly trained staff naturally). Tesco can afford to lose a tin of beans and a bottle of whisky while TfL can cope with the odd evader but at what point does it become endemic and if and when it does how do we or ought we to respond?
Dealing with a couple of desperate individuals is one thing - dealing with a mob of dozens something entirely different.
On the other side, there's the wider issue about the security and surveillance State and the degree to which, for example, Government monitoring of social media is acceptable or desirable in terms of crime prevention - we know it is used as a counter terrorist mechanism for example.
With this sort of unrestricted criminality, we see a society descending towards Hobbes' State of Nature.
I suspect that the majority of people who want to live in a safe, law abiding environment would be happy for a bit more state surveillance if it could put an end to the problem.
Greetings from Dubai!
Dubai has got rid of criminality. It just happens to be home of most of the top guys in the European crime syndicates.
But some of that also stems from the fact they know that even if they detain the shoplifter and hand the over to the police, the chance of any meaningful prosecution is zero. Why risk your employees catching the criminals when the police or courts will just let them go?
The justice system in the UK has no mechanism for dealing with serial petty offenders, which shoplifters tend to be. There was a report in the local rag last year of a woman who got caught stealing from a charity shop - she had over 20 previous convictions for shoplifting, but was still out and about nicking things.
To my mind no-one with 20 convictions for anything should be on the streets.
That does show that it is possible to arrest and convict shoplifters.
The problem is the punishment. Life incarceration would seem both harsh and expensive.
Good morning, everyone.
Confiscations/financial penalties might be the way to go. Doesn't cost the taxpayer anything, costs the perpetrator their widescreen TV.
Just break the buggers arms and they won't be able to nick for a few months
Why not go further and introduce sharia law?
In England and Wales (a known den of liberals) the maximum penalty for shoplifting goods worth up to £200 is imprisonment for six months; otherwise, the maximum is seven years.
For a shoplifter to get seven years, though, they must first have been tried and convicted by a jury. This is assuming they have the effrontery to plead not guilty, which currently they're still allowed to.
If you don't fancy full sharia (e.g. first time removal of left hand, second time the right hand, third time the head), maybe after the xth alleged offence the police should break x of their limbs and then chuck them out of the police station's xth floor window?
And none of this continental stuff about calling the ground floor the first floor either!
Everyone focuses on the penalty.
Yet what is both more powerful, and much cheaper to implement than lengthy prison terms, is the speed at which the process happens.
For shoplifting the whole process could be done within 24 hours. If you contest it at crown court the average wait for shoplifting is now around 400 days.
just lock them in an outdoor shed for 3 days per offence , cheap and effective and stop all benefits immediately
3 days pegged out on a Scottish moor.
Naked.
In midge season.
That'll be deterrent enough!
Chopping off hands and life in prison are completely reasonable ideas, but that's beyond the pale.
The more I hear former Prime Ministers lining up to say they'd be joining in with Trump's folly, the more credit Starmer deserves for keeping us out of it.
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
My Labour vote will be done with gusto. I'm mildly disappointed in this government but all is relative and on that score they are a towering bunch.
Good morning
Good for you remaining loyal
I will vote conservative in May Senedd election, as both of our parties need every vote they can get, and then some
The response to events in Clapham earlier in the week and to the comments of the M&S retail director, one Thinus Keeve, only show how little actual serious response there is to all of this.
The truth was this was an organised group (mob if you like) of several dozen young people who swept down Clapham High Street and terrorised a number of shops. This was clearly organised and orchestrated by social media and the Police response, as shown on CCTV, looked what it was - inadequate.
For all the moaning about Sadiq Khan, no force could mobilise the numbers required that quickly.
Oddly enough, there are plenty of people decrying the end of the "Internet" as a forum for free speech and expression in a period of tightening Government control and legislation yet only supervision (even if it were possible) could have prevented what happened.
The other side of this are the addicts in East Ham High Street who routinely go into shops and steal food and drink. We are told staff in the stores have strict instructions to basically let it happen (much like TfL staff). There are aspects of that which need challenging and a debate about how much we should allow or encourage intervention by staff (only properly trained staff naturally). Tesco can afford to lose a tin of beans and a bottle of whisky while TfL can cope with the odd evader but at what point does it become endemic and if and when it does how do we or ought we to respond?
Dealing with a couple of desperate individuals is one thing - dealing with a mob of dozens something entirely different.
On the other side, there's the wider issue about the security and surveillance State and the degree to which, for example, Government monitoring of social media is acceptable or desirable in terms of crime prevention - we know it is used as a counter terrorist mechanism for example.
With this sort of unrestricted criminality, we see a society descending towards Hobbes' State of Nature.
I suspect that the majority of people who want to live in a safe, law abiding environment would be happy for a bit more state surveillance if it could put an end to the problem.
Octopus Energy are paying me 4p per kwh for any electricty Iconsume between 12.30 and 4pm. If anyone wants a cup of tea...
In related good news,
As children hunt for chocolate eggs and families cook Sunday lunch, something unprecedented could take place in the country’s electricity system this Easter.
Britain could be powered entirely without fossil fuels for the first time.
The body that keeps the lights on is now preparing for the moment renewables and nuclear power everything — even if just for a few minutes. It would be the first time in 144 years the UK has not relied on fossil fuels.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
I think this will be a long drawn out and extremely nasty campaign.
The response to events in Clapham earlier in the week and to the comments of the M&S retail director, one Thinus Keeve, only show how little actual serious response there is to all of this.
The truth was this was an organised group (mob if you like) of several dozen young people who swept down Clapham High Street and terrorised a number of shops. This was clearly organised and orchestrated by social media and the Police response, as shown on CCTV, looked what it was - inadequate.
For all the moaning about Sadiq Khan, no force could mobilise the numbers required that quickly.
Oddly enough, there are plenty of people decrying the end of the "Internet" as a forum for free speech and expression in a period of tightening Government control and legislation yet only supervision (even if it were possible) could have prevented what happened.
The other side of this are the addicts in East Ham High Street who routinely go into shops and steal food and drink. We are told staff in the stores have strict instructions to basically let it happen (much like TfL staff). There are aspects of that which need challenging and a debate about how much we should allow or encourage intervention by staff (only properly trained staff naturally). Tesco can afford to lose a tin of beans and a bottle of whisky while TfL can cope with the odd evader but at what point does it become endemic and if and when it does how do we or ought we to respond?
Dealing with a couple of desperate individuals is one thing - dealing with a mob of dozens something entirely different.
On the other side, there's the wider issue about the security and surveillance State and the degree to which, for example, Government monitoring of social media is acceptable or desirable in terms of crime prevention - we know it is used as a counter terrorist mechanism for example.
With this sort of unrestricted criminality, we see a society descending towards Hobbes' State of Nature.
I suspect that the majority of people who want to live in a safe, law abiding environment would be happy for a bit more state surveillance if it could put an end to the problem.
Greetings from Dubai!
Dubai has got rid of criminality. It just happens to be home of most of the top guys in the European crime syndicates.
Contrary to popular belief, UAE has little problem with detaining and deporting people at the request of other governments.
Meanwhile I can happily leave my wallet and phone on the bar when using the small room, and M&S in Dubai doesn’t need to put security tags on food nor ask the government to sort out organised anarchists groups trashing their shops.
The response to events in Clapham earlier in the week and to the comments of the M&S retail director, one Thinus Keeve, only show how little actual serious response there is to all of this.
The truth was this was an organised group (mob if you like) of several dozen young people who swept down Clapham High Street and terrorised a number of shops. This was clearly organised and orchestrated by social media and the Police response, as shown on CCTV, looked what it was - inadequate.
For all the moaning about Sadiq Khan, no force could mobilise the numbers required that quickly.
Oddly enough, there are plenty of people decrying the end of the "Internet" as a forum for free speech and expression in a period of tightening Government control and legislation yet only supervision (even if it were possible) could have prevented what happened.
The other side of this are the addicts in East Ham High Street who routinely go into shops and steal food and drink. We are told staff in the stores have strict instructions to basically let it happen (much like TfL staff). There are aspects of that which need challenging and a debate about how much we should allow or encourage intervention by staff (only properly trained staff naturally). Tesco can afford to lose a tin of beans and a bottle of whisky while TfL can cope with the odd evader but at what point does it become endemic and if and when it does how do we or ought we to respond?
Dealing with a couple of desperate individuals is one thing - dealing with a mob of dozens something entirely different.
On the other side, there's the wider issue about the security and surveillance State and the degree to which, for example, Government monitoring of social media is acceptable or desirable in terms of crime prevention - we know it is used as a counter terrorist mechanism for example.
With this sort of unrestricted criminality, we see a society descending towards Hobbes' State of Nature.
I suspect that the majority of people who want to live in a safe, law abiding environment would be happy for a bit more state surveillance if it could put an end to the problem.
Greetings from Dubai!
Dubai has got rid of criminality. It just happens to be home of most of the top guys in the European crime syndicates.
Contrary to popular belief, UAE has little problem with detaining and deporting people at the request of other governments.
Meanwhile I can happily leave my wallet and phone on the bar when using the small room, and M&S in Dubai doesn’t need to put security tags on food nor ask the government to sort out organised anarchists groups trashing their shops.
UAE also doesn't have a problem with being the place where most of these criminal gang leaders actually live.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
Marmalade and non citrus jams are different products and codes under WTO definitions. For example you can tariff them differently.
The more I hear former Prime Ministers lining up to say they'd be joining in with Trump's folly, the more credit Starmer deserves for keeping us out of it.
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
My Labour vote will be done with gusto. I'm mildly disappointed in this government but all is relative and on that score they are a towering bunch.
I'm very disappointed. I'll be hoping for a Labour minority with either Green or Lib Dem alliance. Maybe both. Enough of the War on Nature, more European focussed, less Reform-lite, potentially PR but enough of the centrism economically.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
That’s the problem with regulation though. Individually it seems logical (in this case to “avoid confusing the consumer”).
But it all comes at a cost (in this case time and hassle to redesign the labels reset the printing machines) fir marginal, if any, benefit.
Zelensky Offers Ukraine’s Maritime Help as UN Set to Debate Strait of Hormuz
So just to be clear, you wanted us to join the war in Iran?
Why would anyone want to support a criminal regime that spends its time murdering its own people and going round blowing things up to distract from major domestic problems?
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
That’s the problem with regulation though. Individually it seems logical (in this case to “avoid confusing the consumer”).
But it all comes at a cost (in this case time and hassle to redesign the labels reset the printing machines) fir marginal, if any, benefit.
In aggregate it’s a massive drag on the economy
Yes changing a label on marmalade is probably like a 2-3% fall in GDP?
The more I hear former Prime Ministers lining up to say they'd be joining in with Trump's folly, the more credit Starmer deserves for keeping us out of it.
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
My Labour vote will be done with gusto. I'm mildly disappointed in this government but all is relative and on that score they are a towering bunch.
I will vote for the best option amongst those offered.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
Marmalade and non citrus jams are different products and codes under WTO definitions. For example you can tariff them differently.
Thanks. Sounds like the Spaniards need to get lobbying the WTO about their preferred nomenclature too.
I probably also would stick with Labour purely because of the War, despite everything else. Unfortunately, I'm at very clear and present danger of having a Council run by people who want to deport my housemate, colleagues and friends. So it'll be LibDem for me as their bar chart is sadly accurate for once.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
Marmalade and non citrus jams are different products and codes under WTO definitions. For example you can tariff them differently.
Thanks. Sounds like the Spaniards need to get lobbying the WTO about their preferred nomenclature too.
I don't think the WTO cares about names, that's an EU thing. WTO definitions and product codes of jellies, marmalade and jams, if anyone wants an understanding of the kind of thing trade negotiators spend years arguing about
200710
Homogenized preparations of fruits/nuts, obtained by cooking, whether/ not containing added sugar/other sweetening matter
200791
Citrus fruit preparations (excl. homogenized), obtained by cooking, whether/not containing added sugar/other sweetening matter
200799
Fruit Preparations (excl. citrus fruits; excl. homogenized), obtained by cooking, whether/not containing added sugar or sweetening
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
How is this caused by Brexit when it is EU rules which apply across the EU? If we had remained in the EU this would still be exactly the same.
If we were in the EU we would have been able to have a say on the issue.
Not that it matters. It is the "British Sausage" being repeated, but not as comedy this time.
Rubbish. We never managed to have our say when we were in and there is no reason for that to have changed.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
How is this caused by Brexit when it is EU rules which apply across the EU? If we had remained in the EU this would still be exactly the same.
Because if we'd still been a member, it's at least reasonably unlikely to have gone through.
Pre-Brexit we would have had influence over decisions which affect us, and will continue to affect us as a non-member. The performative outrage from people like Patel over something utterly trivial just serves to remind us of that, and also just how ridiculous are some Brexiteers.
Hahahaha. If you believe that then you are no where near as bright as I thought you were.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
They already have “citrus marmalade” in the UK - it’s used for lemon in the main
Frank Cooper also sells Old Fashioned Orange Marmalade
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
Some brexiteers are exercised because this is caused by Keir's embrace of EU laws in preparation for his phytosanitary deal, not directly by brexit. I assume this is what you meant by including "essentially" above.
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
Marmalade is a very specific thing to us Brits whereas the origins are completely different. A quince jam. Quince being marmelo in Portuguese. Also Germany has a very similar sounding name for jams and it seems common to use the word for other types of jam. I assume it was a concession to us to restrict the names use in the early days of the EU being a very specific British thing.
But I agree with you and I hope you are right. I suspect we don't need to say 'citrus marmalade' in the future here and if we do it will be a nonsense jobs worth rule as our understanding of the words will remain unchanged even if different to else where as is the case with many thing (eg chips, biscuits, etc).
I am a big fan of the EU, but I don't approve of petty rules, but as usual I don't expect there to actually be petty rules either, outside of the minds of Daily Mail readers.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
That’s the problem with regulation though. Individually it seems logical (in this case to “avoid confusing the consumer”).
But it all comes at a cost (in this case time and hassle to redesign the labels reset the printing machines) fir marginal, if any, benefit.
In aggregate it’s a massive drag on the economy
Yes changing a label on marmalade is probably like a 2-3% fall in GDP?
No. I said “in aggregate” and I was referring to the totality of well meaning but pointless regulation
But confirmation that Johnson would have dragged us into this. Thank God we have Keir Starmer.
In principle, I agree, but in practice, what's the difference, except enthusiasm? Boris wouldn't have put boots on the ground because there are no US boots on the ground.
It's a genuine question, perhaps we really are benefitting from Sir's 'not our war' positioning, but I cannot immediately see how.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
That’s the problem with regulation though. Individually it seems logical (in this case to “avoid confusing the consumer”).
But it all comes at a cost (in this case time and hassle to redesign the labels reset the printing machines) fir marginal, if any, benefit.
In aggregate it’s a massive drag on the economy
Yes changing a label on marmalade is probably like a 2-3% fall in GDP?
No. I said “in aggregate” and I was referring to the totality of well meaning but pointless regulation
I've missed out on this marmalade thing. Could someone (e) recap?
But I only like the cheapest most rubbishy stuff. Homemade is lost on me, rather not have any.
Different countries have a word like “marmalade”, but mean somewhat different things by it. To ensure free trade, the EU, when the UK was in it, agreed some standards around what the word “marmalade” on a label should mean. These standards aligned with the British usage of the word.
We then left the EU. Without having to accommodate us, the EU then changed its marmalade labelling rules to suit other countries’ usages.
The UK wants to continue trading with the EU, so we’ve signed up to a bunch of food trade rules, including this new marmalade one. That means that we now have to adjust our labelling to match the EU’s new rules. This will mean that what used to be labelled as “marmalade” in the UK will now have to be labelled “citrus marmalade” or similar.
This, some suggest, is emblematic of the problem of Brexit. In the EU, we got to influence the rules. Outside the EU, we still need to trade, but just have to accept the EU’s rules.
That doesn't explain/justify why purely domestic products should follow the EU rules, though. Or would products made solely for the UK use the term properly rather than the EU way?
[NB I don't really care about marmalade, but I'm not sure if this is a blanket change or only for EU exports, the latter of which being totally fine].
Free circulation of goods, which is the government's aim to reduce costly cross border compliance, requires a single set of rules. These rules are dictated by the EU, now with no input from the UK. Previously the UK insisted on marmalade being marmalade but this was changed after Brexit.
Not a big deal in herself but illustrative of the Brexit sovereignty outcome.
On the other hand, we've been able (aided by good stances on both sides of the political aisle) to give to Ukraine without having to appease the likes of Hungary and Slovakia into agreeing. I believe those two countries are threatening to hold up the latest funds/military gear for Ukraine.
Exactly as individual EU members do. What's being held up is the EU loan.
It will be interesting to watch how that one plays out.
Unless he can organise some industrial scale vote-rigging in the next week, it's looking like Orban will be out on his arse by April 13.
He could ask his friends Donald and Vladimir for advice.
I think he's finding that their endorsements are not quite as valuable as he might have originally thought.
This is about Brexiteers needing an excuse to avoid coming to terms with the particular failures caused by their scheme.
But some of that also stems from the fact they know that even if they detain the shoplifter and hand the over to the police, the chance of any meaningful prosecution is zero. Why risk your employees catching the criminals when the police or courts will just let them go?
The justice system in the UK has no mechanism for dealing with serial petty offenders, which shoplifters tend to be. There was a report in the local rag last year of a woman who got caught stealing from a charity shop - she had over 20 previous convictions for shoplifting, but was still out and about nicking things.
To my mind no-one with 20 convictions for anything should be on the streets.
That does show that it is possible to arrest and convict shoplifters.
The problem is the punishment. Life incarceration would seem both harsh and expensive.
Good morning, everyone.
Confiscations/financial penalties might be the way to go. Doesn't cost the taxpayer anything, costs the perpetrator their widescreen TV.
Just break the buggers arms and they won't be able to nick for a few months
Why not go further and introduce sharia law?
In England and Wales (a known den of liberals) the maximum penalty for shoplifting goods worth up to £200 is imprisonment for six months; otherwise, the maximum is seven years.
For a shoplifter to get seven years, though, they must first have been tried and convicted by a jury. This is assuming they have the effrontery to plead not guilty, which currently they're still allowed to.
If you don't fancy full sharia (e.g. first time removal of left hand, second time the right hand, third time the head), maybe after the xth alleged offence the police should break x of their limbs and then chuck them out of the police station's xth floor window?
And none of this continental stuff about calling the ground floor the first floor either!
Everyone focuses on the penalty.
Yet what is both more powerful, and much cheaper to implement than lengthy prison terms, is the speed at which the process happens.
For shoplifting the whole process could be done within 24 hours. If you contest it at crown court the average wait for shoplifting is now around 400 days.
Totally agreed on the ridiculous waiting times.
But twenty-four hours is too short for a defendant to receive all the evidence against them and prepare a defence. And there should be an option for trial by jury for all offences.
Organising a jury trial doesn't have to take a year. In 1952 Derek Bentley was arrested for murder on 2 November and tried at the Old Bailey between 9 and 11 December.
I'd be inclined to permit non-criminal punishments akin to Penalty Charge Notices you get for speeding.
The accused has the right to appeal as with PCNs, but if identified the default is you pay [X] fine and have points against your name. For repeat offences you are taken to court to be criminally charged with the prospect of more severe punishments.
It means low level offenders get speedy punishment that is high enough to be painful but low enough to not warrant appealing if they're dead to rights.
I think there are already various things in this style, comprising for example "community resolutions" and arguably "police cautions".
A correction will appear in tomorrow's print edition: "A headline with an article on Friday about President Trump’s threats to leave NATO misstated the full name of the body. It is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, not the North American Treaty Organization." https://x.com/NYTimesPR/status/2040142477215056082
The headline and premise of the article: “A North American Treaty Organization without America?”
I'll never forget the aid that came to Britain when Argentina attacked NATO territory. God bless those brave American soldiers who gave their lives and kept the Strait of Magellan open.
Actually there was quite a lot of support. The Americans were breaking the Argentine codes in realtime* and sending it direct to Northwood. Quite often, UK commanders were reading Argentine orders before the recipients were.
*because they’d sold the coding machines to the Argentines
But confirmation that Johnson would have dragged us into this. Thank God we have Keir Starmer.
In principle, I agree, but in practice, what's the difference, except enthusiasm? Boris wouldn't have put boots on the ground because there are no US boots on the ground.
It's a genuine question, perhaps we really are benefitting from Sir's 'not our war' positioning, but I cannot immediately see how.
I sort of agree that we are not seeing the benefits. "Not our war" is imo correct, but I do not think SKS is positive enough to benefit from it, because more is needed.
In my view Trump takes and takes and takes until stopped. So one outcome of non-confrontational approaches is that the next thing he does will be even worse than this war of choice - unless he is halted in his tracks.
Of course he will continue to look for other people to blame, being congenitally unable to take responsibility for himself, but that does not effect the need for serious pushback.
I'd also say that the UK positioning in the post-Trump age, when the USA will have withdrawn back to wherever it withdraws back to, and may be an adversary for the democratic world not an ally. But I do not see signs that we are no the front foot on this.
We need to remember Churchill and FDR, who were designing the post-war settlement from 1941. We need to be looking at things such as where the UK will sit in what comes next - for example that we remain the major international hub for financial services. For example currently the EU are building "USA free" payment systems, as are the BRICS, and I do not see us in that arena.
In the wine industry in France, the modern labelling systems print the labels on demand and apply them automatically to the bottle.
So, a similar setup for marmalade.
Setup a reactive demand system - print the labels according to vendor, per order.
So the vendors targeting one demographic get “Spitfire Marmalade - Fuck you to the EU”. Plus lots of union jacks.
For the boxes going to other vendors “Ode to Joy Bitter Marmalade. Which makes Brexiters cry. Bitterly.”
I was inspired in this by a chap who used to own both the Starbucks franchise on St Katherine’s Dock in Oondon, and the neighbouring independent coffee shop. The independent coffee shop was full of “sign up to protest about Starbucks” leaflets.
A correction will appear in tomorrow's print edition: "A headline with an article on Friday about President Trump’s threats to leave NATO misstated the full name of the body. It is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, not the North American Treaty Organization." https://x.com/NYTimesPR/status/2040142477215056082
The headline and premise of the article: “A North American Treaty Organization without America?”
I'll never forget the aid that came to Britain when Argentina attacked NATO territory. God bless those brave American soldiers who gave their lives and kept the Strait of Magellan open.
Article 6 of the NATO treaty clearly defines the area of responsibility as north of the Tropic of Cancer (Henry Miller fans please explain) so the Falkland Isands are definitively NOT NATO territory.
The US did give a lot of help (specifically AIM-9L) but not as much they could have.
I hadn't been paying much attention to the huge marmalade "scandal", but AFAICS it seems that a conserve labelled "orange marmalade" can remain labelled "orange marmalade" (or "lime marmalade", etc).
It just can't be labelled "marmalade"
That's it.
Brexiteers seem to be inventing problems, essentially caused by Brexit, which aren't really problems at all.
Are they entirely sane ?
How is this caused by Brexit when it is EU rules which apply across the EU? If we had remained in the EU this would still be exactly the same.
If we were in the EU we would have been able to have a say on the issue.
Not that it matters. It is the "British Sausage" being repeated, but not as comedy this time.
Rubbish. We never managed to have our say when we were in and there is no reason for that to have changed.
I distinctly remember it all being called "Marmalade" not "Citrus Marmalade" for the first X decades of my life whilst we were in the EEC / EC / EU.
Comments
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=war+in+iran+popularity+plumets#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:5e34b4f6,vid:naTIjY25mG4,st:0
Kemi has gone full defiant in the Telegrubby 'i fight on regardless of results May 7th'
By (extremely amateurish) reading of Expectation Management runes, shes unlikely to want to have that as the main discussion in the aftermath so their internal expectations must be on the 'bit less terrible than predicted' side of the see saw.
What they get is a different matter of course
I might even give him a sympathy vote in May in support of his foreign policy, not that Labour stand a chance here.
On the grounds that Labour will be more catastrophic.
One interesting question is if a Green blow out and Lab catastrophe sees a similar poll shift Lab Green as we saw Con Ref last May
Personally, I find it hard to care.
But the articles don't seem to actually explain why, if the definition of marmalade is simply being widened to allow any fruit - which is fine! - we would need to introduce the "citrus marmalade" labelling category at all. It would be interesting to know.
Good for you remaining loyal
I will vote conservative in May Senedd election, as both of our parties need every vote they can get, and then some
Is that likely to be different this time tomorrow?
Seville wars are always bitter.
Meanwhile I can happily leave my wallet and phone on the bar when using the small room, and M&S in Dubai doesn’t need to put security tags on food nor ask the government to sort out organised anarchists groups trashing their shops.
But confirmation that Johnson would have dragged us into this. Thank God we have Keir Starmer.
But it all comes at a cost (in this case time and hassle to redesign the labels reset the printing machines) fir marginal, if any, benefit.
In aggregate it’s a massive drag on the economy
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/73120
Zelensky Offers Ukraine’s Maritime Help as UN Set to Debate Strait of Hormuz
She’s going to have to wear it like a noose.
Or the Americans, for that matter?
(Be honest, I had you there didn't I?)
NEE THREAD
Unfortunately, I'm at very clear and present danger of having a Council run by people who want to deport my housemate, colleagues and friends.
So it'll be LibDem for me as their bar chart is sadly accurate for once.
200710
Homogenized preparations of fruits/nuts, obtained by cooking, whether/ not containing added sugar/other sweetening matter
200791
Citrus fruit preparations (excl. homogenized), obtained by cooking, whether/not containing added sugar/other sweetening matter
200799
Fruit Preparations (excl. citrus fruits; excl. homogenized), obtained by cooking, whether/not containing added sugar or sweetening
Frank Cooper also sells Old Fashioned Orange Marmalade
But I agree with you and I hope you are right. I suspect we don't need to say 'citrus marmalade' in the future here and if we do it will be a nonsense jobs worth rule as our understanding of the words will remain unchanged even if different to else where as is the case with many thing (eg chips, biscuits, etc).
I am a big fan of the EU, but I don't approve of petty rules, but as usual I don't expect there to actually be petty rules either, outside of the minds of Daily Mail readers.
It's a genuine question, perhaps we really are benefitting from Sir's 'not our war' positioning, but I cannot immediately see how.
And penalty notices for minor crimes are also a thing:
https://www.gov.uk/caution-warning-penalty
I'm not familiar with very much of the detail.
*because they’d sold the coding machines to the Argentines
In my view Trump takes and takes and takes until stopped. So one outcome of non-confrontational approaches is that the next thing he does will be even worse than this war of choice - unless he is halted in his tracks.
Of course he will continue to look for other people to blame, being congenitally unable to take responsibility for himself, but that does not effect the need for serious pushback.
I'd also say that the UK positioning in the post-Trump age, when the USA will have withdrawn back to wherever it withdraws back to, and may be an adversary for the democratic world not an ally. But I do not see signs that we are no the front foot on this.
We need to remember Churchill and FDR, who were designing the post-war settlement from 1941. We need to be looking at things such as where the UK will sit in what comes next - for example that we remain the major international hub for financial services. For example currently the EU are building "USA free" payment systems, as are the BRICS, and I do not see us in that arena.
In the wine industry in France, the modern labelling systems print the labels on demand and apply them automatically to the bottle.
So, a similar setup for marmalade.
Setup a reactive demand system - print the labels according to vendor, per order.
So the vendors targeting one demographic get “Spitfire Marmalade - Fuck you to the EU”. Plus lots of union jacks.
For the boxes going to other vendors “Ode to Joy Bitter Marmalade. Which makes Brexiters cry. Bitterly.”
I was inspired in this by a chap who used to own both the Starbucks franchise on St Katherine’s Dock in Oondon, and the neighbouring independent coffee shop. The independent coffee shop was full of “sign up to protest about Starbucks” leaflets.
The US did give a lot of help (specifically AIM-9L) but not as much they could have.
So we had some sort of say.