Link - The Times letters to the Editor - Page 24 August 6th 2015 ( Paper version)
Absolutely Stunning first letter in the Times this morning from His Honour Judge Nigel Seed QC. He was the prosecuting council at the so called trial of the brothel keeper and the allegations against Ted Heath. He states the defendant said if the trial commenced allegations would be made.
He explains that because of the allegation made at the time absolutely entirely unsubstantiated in any way, two witnesses refused to appear. One even when brought from Holloway refused to leave the court cell. There was no chance of any conviction let alone trial so his honour as the lead prosecutor decided to offer no evidence. and the defendant walked free without a trial. He states "the decision was mine and mine alone"
So basically we have simply trashed a PM for absolutely no reason, no foundation, no evidence and hearsay. Why did Wiltshire police not just ask him instead of standing outside his house at a press conference and fanning a no existent fire ??
I don't like Heath by the way but this goes way beyond this.
The best thing to come out of this, was the reaction of some of the deranged Outers.
I paraphrase, pro-EU people like Heath were only pro-EU because they were blackmailed into being Pro-EU because they are paedos.
Still it has been a good week for manufacturers of tin foil
I concede there is some interpretation here, I gave you mine.
Of course what really matters is what other countries decide. And there would no doubt be more than enough who would decide that it is a new state (thus removing it as a UN Security Council member and likely leading to Security Council reform).
Recognition is not a Security Council matter, it is a General Assembly matter and as such would only require one objection and a simple majority in the vote.
I don't fancy England's chances.
TBH Dair, I would be surprised if there were a problem for a post-independence UK from that point of view. I'm not an expert and if I'm wrong I'd be happy to be corrected, but I don't recall Sudan being considered a 'new' country after the secession of South Sudan, or Pakistan after the independence of Bangladesh, or Australia following Papua New Guinea's independence (that one was on much the same terms Salmond was asking for Scotland last year).
Like I say, I could be wrong, and none of them had a security council seat or nuclear weapons (at that time) which may make a difference. But I think those would be ample precedents under international law that the UK would continue and Scotland would be a new state.
As I said, it's all down to interpretation.
So if Edinburgh (population 465,000 about the same as Scotland as a percentage of the UK) seceded from Scotland - Scotland would have to change its name and reapply to join the UN?
It's also worth noting that in fiction, hurting animals (or protecting them from harm) is a pretty much bulletproof indicator over whether someone's an utter **** or not. Harming humans to a great extent can be made explicable or even acceptable, but the same doesn't apply to animals.
House of Cards [original programme] didn't get any complaints when FU murdered someone, but when he shot his dog (effectively putting it down as the hound as very old, and not shown on-screen) there were many. And that was [arguably, at least] humane.
As an aside, I gave Sir Edric's manservant the name 'Dog'. Hopefully that conveys an immediate sense of closeness but also a very definite pecking order.
Undoubtedly. Heroes and heroines in Grimdark fiction practice mass crucifixion, flaying, live burning, torture, and rape, without undermining their appeal to the general reader. But, hurting an animal would place them beyond redemption.
Not just fiction. Remember the hero status bestowed on Sefton after the other 7 horses were killed by the IRA bomb in 1981? Apparently four guardsmen were killed as well, but they seemed to get less attention.
It was even mentioned as the key part of the story in this very tragic follow-up:
In the mid-1990s I shared an office with an American colleague. One morning, as we were starting to work, he expressed his bemusement at the front pages of the broadsheets covering the death of a racehorse. "Ah, but it's Red Rum", I said. "He was very special". He looked blank.
One of my other colleagues walked in the room at this point and I filled her in on our discussion. "BUT IT'S RED RUM" she half-shouted.
I don't think he ever really understood.
I thought horses was a Russian thing, or maybe Catherine the Great was the only Russian with a horse fixation
It's also worth noting that in fiction, hurting animals (or protecting them from harm) is a pretty much bulletproof indicator over whether someone's an utter **** or not. Harming humans to a great extent can be made explicable or even acceptable, but the same doesn't apply to animals.
House of Cards [original programme] didn't get any complaints when FU murdered someone, but when he shot his dog (effectively putting it down as the hound as very old, and not shown on-screen) there were many. And that was [arguably, at least] humane.
As an aside, I gave Sir Edric's manservant the name 'Dog'. Hopefully that conveys an immediate sense of closeness but also a very definite pecking order.
Undoubtedly. Heroes and heroines in Grimdark fiction practice mass crucifixion, flaying, live burning, torture, and rape, without undermining their appeal to the general reader. But, hurting an animal would place them beyond redemption.
Not just fiction. Remember the hero status bestowed on Sefton after the other 7 horses were killed by the IRA bomb in 1981? Apparently four guardsmen were killed as well, but they seemed to get less attention.
It was even mentioned as the key part of the story in this very tragic follow-up:
In the mid-1990s I shared an office with an American colleague. One morning, as we were starting to work, he expressed his bemusement at the front pages of the broadsheets covering the death of a racehorse. "Ah, but it's Red Rum", I said. "He was very special". He looked blank.
One of my other colleagues walked in the room at this point and I filled her in on our discussion. "BUT IT'S RED RUM" she half-shouted.
I don't think he ever really understood.
If he'd been from Kentucky he'd have understood.
I have an American boss who's obsessed with racing. On those occasions when he's over, we often spend half our time looking at the Racing Post and discussing horses rather than anything as tiresome as work.
When Zenyatta passes away it'll be on all the US bulletins I suspect. Certain animals, particularly horses are inherent to the psyche of a nation, Red Rum was here - Secretariat for the USA.
Link - The Times letters to the Editor - Page 24 August 6th 2015 ( Paper version)
Absolutely Stunning first letter in the Times this morning from His Honour Judge Nigel Seed QC. He was the prosecuting council at the so called trial of the brothel keeper and the allegations against Ted Heath. He states the defendant said if the trial commenced allegations would be made.
He explains that because of the allegation made at the time absolutely entirely unsubstantiated in any way, two witnesses refused to appear. One even when brought from Holloway refused to leave the court cell. There was no chance of any conviction let alone trial so his honour as the lead prosecutor decided to offer no evidence. and the defendant walked free without a trial. He states "the decision was mine and mine alone"
So basically we have simply trashed a PM for absolutely no reason, no foundation, no evidence and hearsay. Why did Wiltshire police not just ask him instead of standing outside his house at a press conference and fanning a no existent fire ??
I don't like Heath by the way but this goes way beyond this.
Good article which agrees with many points made on this thread, even before the latest questions about the whole saga were raised
An article on Labour list about how homelessness is, in this age of austerity a terrible problem, and they need to have a policy to deal with this epidemic. I couldnt resist pointing out in the comments that homelessness is at an historically unusually low level, and substantially lower than what it was a decade ago, even with the mild uptick since the coalition took over in 2010.
When you are in a climate of tight resources, you have to use those resources in the most efficient way possible. Focusing on an issue that has already reduced by two thirds is maybe not where you should be looking.
Had a pretty easy journey in again today, guess that's the luck of being on the north side of the river.
IMHO I don't take a stance on the strike. It's a matter for TFL and the unions to sort out. The way the Tories always politicize this and demand Labour condemn the strike is pretty pathetic. As is their continued obsession with tube driver salaries.
Yes the strike is a bit of a pain in the arse, but that's the point!
and you don't see the point of the Tories approach?
An article on Labour list about how homelessness is, in this age of austerity a terrible problem, and they need to have a policy to deal with this epidemic. I couldnt resist pointing out in the comments that homelessness is at an historically unusually low level, and substantially lower than what it was a decade ago, even with the mild uptick since the coalition took over in 2010.
When you are in a climate of tight resources, you have to use those resources in the most efficient way possible. Focusing on an issue that has already reduced by two thirds is maybe not where you should be looking.
Do they mean rough sleeping?
Homelessness is much wider. (And there are parts of the homelessness regime which need a look at.)
England bowl (reckless perhaps, with a rookie attack)
Australia 1 change - Shaun Marsh replaces his brother.
Wood in for Anderson.
Both these attacks could leak runs very quickly. They're both led by experienced but mercurial bowlers, backed up by excellent pacemen who are inexperienced and lose line and length quickly under pressure, and two fairly ordinary spinners. England do though have five bowlers, Australia just four (it's even being said Voges might bowl if needed)!
Could be a very entertaining match, especially as I see Rogers has helpfully thrown away his wicket third ball.
England bowl (reckless perhaps, with a rookie attack)
Australia 1 change - Shaun Marsh replaces his brother.
Wood in for Anderson.
Both these attacks could leak runs very quickly. They're both led by experienced but mercurial bowlers, backed up by excellent pacemen who are inexperienced and lose line and length quickly under pressure, and two fairly ordinary spinners. England do though have five bowlers, Australia just four (it's even being said Voges might bowl if needed)!
Could be a very entertaining match, especially as I see Rogers has helpfully thrown away his wicket third ball.
England bowl (reckless perhaps, with a rookie attack)
Australia 1 change - Shaun Marsh replaces his brother.
Wood in for Anderson.
Both these attacks could leak runs very quickly. They're both led by experienced but mercurial bowlers, backed up by excellent pacemen who are inexperienced and lose line and length quickly under pressure, and two fairly ordinary spinners. England do though have five bowlers, Australia just four (it's even being said Voges might bowl if needed)!
Could be a very entertaining match, especially as I see Rogers has helpfully thrown away his wicket third ball.
England bowl (reckless perhaps, with a rookie attack)
Australia 1 change - Shaun Marsh replaces his brother.
Wood in for Anderson.
Both these attacks could leak runs very quickly. They're both led by experienced but mercurial bowlers, backed up by excellent pacemen who are inexperienced and lose line and length quickly under pressure, and two fairly ordinary spinners. England do though have five bowlers, Australia just four (it's even being said Voges might bowl if needed)!
Could be a very entertaining match, especially as I see Rogers has helpfully thrown away his wicket third ball.
Now 10 for 2 after 1 over!
Perhaps they think this would be a 5 over game?!
NOOO! Think of those people who have tickets for tomorrow!
(I haven't any tickets at all, by the way. It's just virtue signalling.)
But I wonder if Gorgeous George had a word with Matt?
THe man who gave us the word 'omnishambles'? I don't think we should get carried away.
In any case, if that was the idea it hasn't really worked - the Grauniad is still pushing the 'Tories eat babies' line:
'Kids Company closure: 6,000 children have lost support Charity’s founder blames civil servants, ministers and media for its demise, as government seeks alternative services for at risk youngsters ...Outside the charity’s premises in Camberwell, south London, Sharlene Reid, 27, who had been supported by Kids Company as a youngster and volunteered there herself, said the street outside had earlier seen protests by parents and children who relied on the charity’s services.
She said: “You just drop the bomb like that and expect people to just move on? There’s people’s lives at stake here, as well as the children. What about them?
“We have to make the government hear us. We were protesting. It was not planned, we all came here because they said it was shutting down, come and collect your things. My friend WhatsApped me this morning and I said, ‘it’s got that bad?’
Clarke will really appreciate the move from 4 to 5
Gavaskar, I think it was, dropped from opening to 4 during a lean run, and the opener and 3 got ducks. As he walked in, a bowler said 'doesn't matter where you bat, score's still 0.' He went on to score something like 200...
Clarke will really appreciate the move from 4 to 5
Gavaskar, I think it was, dropped from opening to 4 during a lean run, and the opener and 3 got ducks. As he walked in, a bowler said 'doesn't matter where you bat, score's still 0.' He went on to score something like 200...
England bowl (reckless perhaps, with a rookie attack)
Australia 1 change - Shaun Marsh replaces his brother.
Wood in for Anderson.
Both these attacks could leak runs very quickly. They're both led by experienced but mercurial bowlers, backed up by excellent pacemen who are inexperienced and lose line and length quickly under pressure, and two fairly ordinary spinners. England do though have five bowlers, Australia just four (it's even being said Voges might bowl if needed)!
Could be a very entertaining match, especially as I see Rogers has helpfully thrown away his wicket third ball.
Now 10 for 2 after 1 over!
Perhaps they think this would be a 5 over game?!
NOOO! Think of those people who have tickets for tomorrow!
(I haven't any tickets at all, by the way. It's just virtue signalling.)
I concede there is some interpretation here, I gave you mine.
Of course what really matters is what other countries decide. And there would no doubt be more than enough who would decide that it is a new state (thus removing it as a UN Security Council member and likely leading to Security Council reform).
Recognition is not a Security Council matter, it is a General Assembly matter and as such would only require one objection and a simple majority in the vote.
I don't fancy England's chances.
TBH Dair, I would be surprised if there were a problem for a post-independence UK from that point of view. I'm not an expert and if I'm wrong I'd be happy to be corrected, but I don't recall Sudan being considered a 'new' country after the secession of South Sudan, or Pakistan after the independence of Bangladesh, or Australia following Papua New Guinea's independence (that one was on much the same terms Salmond was asking for Scotland last year).
Like I say, I could be wrong, and none of them had a security council seat or nuclear weapons (at that time) which may make a difference. But I think those would be ample precedents under international law that the UK would continue and Scotland would be a new state.
As I said, it's all down to interpretation.
So if Edinburgh (population 465,000 about the same as Scotland as a percentage of the UK) seceded from Scotland - Scotland would have to change its name and reapply to join the UN?
Whit happened to puir, wee Glenrothes? A reductio ad absurdum too far or the sickening realisation you'd screwed up your percentages?
An article on Labour list about how homelessness is, in this age of austerity a terrible problem, and they need to have a policy to deal with this epidemic. I couldnt resist pointing out in the comments that homelessness is at an historically unusually low level, and substantially lower than what it was a decade ago, even with the mild uptick since the coalition took over in 2010.
When you are in a climate of tight resources, you have to use those resources in the most efficient way possible. Focusing on an issue that has already reduced by two thirds is maybe not where you should be looking.
But this virtue signalling is, at least, free on a blog and costless to the taxpayer.
Yesterday's sale of RBS shares into the global financial crisis market, in the aftermath of the most intense point of the European sovereign debt crisis, in a low-interest rate environment, was a massive virtue signal about the "propriety" of privatisation, probably costing the taxpayer millions of pounds.
I concede there is some interpretation here, I gave you mine.
Of course what really matters is what other countries decide. And there would no doubt be more than enough who would decide that it is a new state (thus removing it as a UN Security Council member and likely leading to Security Council reform).
Recognition is not a Security Council matter, it is a General Assembly matter and as such would only require one objection and a simple majority in the vote.
I don't fancy England's chances.
TBH Dair, I would be surprised if there were a problem for a post-independence UK from that point of view. I'm not an expert and if I'm wrong I'd be happy to be corrected, but I don't recall Sudan being considered a 'new' country after the secession of South Sudan, or Pakistan after the independence of Bangladesh, or Australia following Papua New Guinea's independence (that one was on much the same terms Salmond was asking for Scotland last year).
Like I say, I could be wrong, and none of them had a security council seat or nuclear weapons (at that time) which may make a difference. But I think those would be ample precedents under international law that the UK would continue and Scotland would be a new state.
As I said, it's all down to interpretation.
So if Edinburgh (population 465,000 about the same as Scotland as a percentage of the UK) seceded from Scotland - Scotland would have to change its name and reapply to join the UN?
Whit happened to puir, wee Glenrothes? A reductio ad absurdum too far or the sickening realisation you'd screwed up your percentages?
At least I correct my misteps - hows that $150 oil doing?
Edit - I know 'its neither good nor bad for Scotland that oil is $50/barrel'.....
But I wonder if Gorgeous George had a word with Matt?
THe man who gave us the word 'omnishambles'? I don't think we should get carried away.
In any case, if that was the idea it hasn't really worked - the Grauniad is still pushing the 'Tories eat babies' line:
'Kids Company closure: 6,000 children have lost support Charity’s founder blames civil servants, ministers and media for its demise, as government seeks alternative services for at risk youngsters ...Outside the charity’s premises in Camberwell, south London, Sharlene Reid, 27, who had been supported by Kids Company as a youngster and volunteered there herself, said the street outside had earlier seen protests by parents and children who relied on the charity’s services.
She said: “You just drop the bomb like that and expect people to just move on? There’s people’s lives at stake here, as well as the children. What about them?
“We have to make the government hear us. We were protesting. It was not planned, we all came here because they said it was shutting down, come and collect your things. My friend WhatsApped me this morning and I said, ‘it’s got that bad?’
The Guardian is not a serious newspaper. It decides its opinions regardless of any facts, frankly. Anything a Tory government does is wrong, in its eyes.
The one thing I still don't understand: what services exactly did this charity provide? What did it actually do? What went on at its Camberwell premises? And are there really 6000 children in South London reliant on KC?
The "6000 kids have lost support" line could mean just that. But it's vague enough to encompass: we have a library here available to 6000 kids and if it closes they can't use it even though in fact only 38 kids actually use it or, if it closes, they can go to another library a bit further away.
The Guardian's editorial policy is "what can we publish today which might embarrass the Tories? And by the way, make sure the BBC have plenty of copies - they use us for their story board."
Sensible move by Ruth D, unless there is a major in sentiment I can't see the Tories or LibDems getting a list seat in Glasgow. Tommy Sheridan is the wild card candidate.
In terms of Lothian, she'll need to ensure she is at the top of the list to be sure of getting a seat, not sure what the process the Tories use to determine this though.
Nor do I, but I'm guessing that it's probably not names out of a hat and that being the leader may be of some small assistance to her.
The list systems used in this country absolutely stink. They are the most blatant form of political patronage in elections - ignoring the Lords, for a minute - since the abolition of the rotten boroughs in 1832.
Your mention of rotten boroughs prodded me into thinking that Labour has brought back the central concept of rotten boroughs i.e. "Cash for Votes". However they have tweaked the process by making the voter pay rather than vice versa; an insight into Labour's grip on the meaning of democracy?
I concede there is some interpretation here, I gave you mine.
Of course what really matters is what other countries decide. And there would no doubt be more than enough who would decide that it is a new state (thus removing it as a UN Security Council member and likely leading to Security Council reform).
Recognition is not a Security Council matter, it is a General Assembly matter and as such would only require one objection and a simple majority in the vote.
I don't fancy England's chances.
TBH Dair, I would be surprised if there were a problem for a post-independence UK from that point of view. I'm not an expert and if I'm wrong I'd be happy to be corrected, but I don't recall Sudan being considered a 'new' country after the secession of South Sudan, or Pakistan after the independence of Bangladesh, or Australia following Papua New Guinea's independence (that one was on much the same terms Salmond was asking for Scotland last year).
Like I say, I could be wrong, and none of them had a security council seat or nuclear weapons (at that time) which may make a difference. But I think those would be ample precedents under international law that the UK would continue and Scotland would be a new state.
As I said, it's all down to interpretation.
So if Edinburgh (population 465,000 about the same as Scotland as a percentage of the UK) seceded from Scotland - Scotland would have to change its name and reapply to join the UN?
Whit happened to puir, wee Glenrothes? A reductio ad absurdum too far or the sickening realisation you'd screwed up your percentages?
At least I correct my misteps - hows that $150 oil doing?
Edit - I know 'its neither good nor bad for Scotland that oil is $50/barrel'.....
PB's very own Vicky Pollard strikes back with a zinger!
'Why can't you tell the difference between 1% & 10%?'
Sensible move by Ruth D, unless there is a major in sentiment I can't see the Tories or LibDems getting a list seat in Glasgow. Tommy Sheridan is the wild card candidate.
In terms of Lothian, she'll need to ensure she is at the top of the list to be sure of getting a seat, not sure what the process the Tories use to determine this though.
Nor do I, but I'm guessing that it's probably not names out of a hat and that being the leader may be of some small assistance to her.
The list systems used in this country absolutely stink. They are the most blatant form of political patronage in elections - ignoring the Lords, for a minute - since the abolition of the rotten boroughs in 1832.
Yes, including the one-person list used for elections to Westminster.
I concede there is some interpretation here, I gave you mine.
Of course what really matters is what other countries decide. And there would no doubt be more than enough who would decide that it is a new state (thus removing it as a UN Security Council member and likely leading to Security Council reform).
Recognition is not a Security Council matter, it is a General Assembly matter and as such would only require one objection and a simple majority in the vote.
I don't fancy England's chances.
TBH Dair, I would be surprised if there were a problem for a post-independence UK from that point of view. I'm not an expert and if I'm wrong I'd be happy to be corrected, but I don't recall Sudan being considered a 'new' country after the secession of South Sudan, or Pakistan after the independence of Bangladesh, or Australia following Papua New Guinea's independence (that one was on much the same terms Salmond was asking for Scotland last year).
Like I say, I could be wrong, and none of them had a security council seat or nuclear weapons (at that time) which may make a difference. But I think those would be ample precedents under international law that the UK would continue and Scotland would be a new state.
As I said, it's all down to interpretation.
So if Edinburgh (population 465,000 about the same as Scotland as a percentage of the UK) seceded from Scotland - Scotland would have to change its name and reapply to join the UN?
Whit happened to puir, wee Glenrothes? A reductio ad absurdum too far or the sickening realisation you'd screwed up your percentages?
At least I correct my misteps - hows that $150 oil doing?
Edit - I know 'its neither good nor bad for Scotland that oil is $50/barrel'.....
PB's very own Vicky Pollard strikes back with a zinger!
'Why can't you tell the difference between 1% & 10%?'
The original point still stands - secession of 8% of a countries population does not lead to the cavalcade of devastations wreaked upon the remaining 92% of some Nats fond imaginings....and as usual, I haven't intruded on the private grief of the SNP's bungled Police reforms, but revealing that you are so sensitive to it.....
Frankly, it sounds a bit like Scientology to my ears when I read about *weekly supervisions* with staff. Camilla met 75 staff and 2 children over 9hrs over 2 days.
Everyone appears to get these from kids, to their parents to the staff:
- reflexology - hypnotism - massage [with the door unlocked] - spa treatments - manicures - facials - meals - pocket money in brown envelops
- 73% of funds goes on staff, there appear to be more staff than children and a huge focus on labeling behaviour [that sounds pretty average] with -isms.
On Batman, she claims that she can barely read and can't do sums [despite being at boarding school from 11yrs], has 3 PAs, has never read a novel and can't drive or even open an ironing board.
It's important for fiction to be able to delve into grim areas, whether that's violence, sex, psychological pain or humour that is deemed to cross the line. It's one of various areas that makes me worried about freedom of speech given the bleating that comes from some quarters about how offended/upset they are.
As an aside, I have acquired a puppy. She has mastered the art of going outside twice, then urinating in the kitchen. The plus side of having had a large (30-35kg, circa 4st) dog that was prone to diarrhoea that took 1-2 hours to clean up is that puppy crap is like playing a videogame on easy when you've already beaten it on nightmare mode.
The pitch isn't doing much, confidence will be high and terrible for the Aussies. Even if they rescue this to say 150 you can see them repeating the same mistake in the second innings.
But I wonder if Gorgeous George had a word with Matt?
THe man who gave us the word 'omnishambles'? I don't think we should get carried away.
In any case, if that was the idea it hasn't really worked - the Grauniad is still pushing the 'Tories eat babies' line:
'Kids Company closure: 6,000 children have lost support Charity’s founder blames civil servants, ministers and media for its demise, as government seeks alternative services for at risk youngsters ...Outside the charity’s premises in Camberwell, south London, Sharlene Reid, 27, who had been supported by Kids Company as a youngster and volunteered there herself, said the street outside had earlier seen protests by parents and children who relied on the charity’s services.
She said: “You just drop the bomb like that and expect people to just move on? There’s people’s lives at stake here, as well as the children. What about them?
“We have to make the government hear us. We were protesting. It was not planned, we all came here because they said it was shutting down, come and collect your things. My friend WhatsApped me this morning and I said, ‘it’s got that bad?’
The Guardian is not a serious newspaper. It decides its opinions regardless of any facts, frankly. Anything a Tory government does is wrong, in its eyes.
The one thing I still don't understand: what services exactly did this charity provide? What did it actually do? What went on at its Camberwell premises? And are there really 6000 children in South London reliant on KC?
The "6000 kids have lost support" line could mean just that. But it's vague enough to encompass: we have a library here available to 6000 kids and if it closes they can't use it even though in fact only 38 kids actually use it or, if it closes, they can go to another library a bit further away.
I'd assume that it is 'we've supported 6,000 kids in the last 20 years'...
On the subject of horses, Herself tells me that the University of Sussex have run a research project which proves horses have facial expressions which show their mood and emotions. Well, ffs, who would have thought it? Anyone who has been around horses for even a short time could have told them that. What next I wonder, HEFC gives a research grant to a team seeking to explore whether the sun really does rise in the East?
At a time when funding for science research is under such severe strain what on earth are we doing spending taxpayers money to prove the bleedin' obvious and common knowledge?
So far about 80,000 spectators who bought tickets for the Ashes have had their day fail to materialise due to an early finish. Looks like that could hit 100,000 with this match.
Boycott now saying that this is the worst batting he has ever seen from an Australian side in 50 years of watching cricket.
Hard to imagine that it's wrong - when have Australia ever collapsed like this in England? At least they made it to about 30 before the procession began at Headingley in 1981.
What's your new lady's name? Love the video game analogy!
I have a kitty with a runny bum that nothing will fix. Her favourite trick is going in the tray, then jumping on my knee/bed... I push her off, then she washes her tail...
It's important for fiction to be able to delve into grim areas, whether that's violence, sex, psychological pain or humour that is deemed to cross the line. It's one of various areas that makes me worried about freedom of speech given the bleating that comes from some quarters about how offended/upset they are.
As an aside, I have acquired a puppy. She has mastered the art of going outside twice, then urinating in the kitchen. The plus side of having had a large (30-35kg, circa 4st) dog that was prone to diarrhoea that took 1-2 hours to clean up is that puppy crap is like playing a videogame on easy when you've already beaten it on nightmare mode.
On the subject of horses, Herself tells me that the University of Sussex have run a research project which proves horses have facial expressions which show their mood and emotions. Well, ffs, who would have thought it? Anyone who has been around horses for even a short time could have told them that. What next I wonder, HEFC gives a research grant to a team seeking to explore whether the sun really does rise in the East?
At a time when funding for science research is under such severe strain what on earth are we doing spending taxpayers money to prove the bleedin' obvious and common knowledge?
There was a time when a research grant was given to find the way to cook the perfect piece of toast. Apparently it was with a toaster. (Honestly, I am not making that up.)
Miss Plato, Meg. Got her suddenly [parents keen to get one]. I would've preferred to think of a better name, but Meg's not awful and we can't call her 'dog' whilst I spend several weeks contemplating the matter.
But I wonder if Gorgeous George had a word with Matt?
THe man who gave us the word 'omnishambles'? I don't think we should get carried away.
In any case, if that was the idea it hasn't really worked - the Grauniad is still pushing the 'Tories eat babies' line:
'Kids Company closure: 6,000 children have lost support Charity’s founder blames civil servants, ministers and media for its demise, as government seeks alternative services for at risk youngsters ...Outside the charity’s premises in Camberwell, south London, Sharlene Reid, 27, who had been supported by Kids Company as a youngster and volunteered there herself, said the street outside had earlier seen protests by parents and children who relied on the charity’s services.
She said: “You just drop the bomb like that and expect people to just move on? There’s people’s lives at stake here, as well as the children. What about them?
“We have to make the government hear us. We were protesting. It was not planned, we all came here because they said it was shutting down, come and collect your things. My friend WhatsApped me this morning and I said, ‘it’s got that bad?’
The Guardian is not a serious newspaper. It decides its opinions regardless of any facts, frankly. Anything a Tory government does is wrong, in its eyes.
The one thing I still don't understand: what services exactly did this charity provide? What did it actually do? What went on at its Camberwell premises? And are there really 6000 children in South London reliant on KC?
The "6000 kids have lost support" line could mean just that. But it's vague enough to encompass: we have a library here available to 6000 kids and if it closes they can't use it even though in fact only 38 kids actually use it or, if it closes, they can go to another library a bit further away.
I'd assume that it is 'we've supported 6,000 kids in the last 20 years'...
So basically we have simply trashed a PM for absolutely no reason, no foundation, no evidence and hearsay. Why did Wiltshire police not just ask him instead of standing outside his house at a press conference and fanning a no existent fire ??
I don't like Heath by the way but this goes way beyond this.
Because he's dead?
But this was the point I made at the outset: because the accusation of paedophilia is so toxic, and the belief that there is 'no smoke without fire' there is a very strong case of anonymity being preserved until, at least, court is reached.
Boycott now saying that this is the worst batting he has ever seen from an Australian side in 50 years of watching cricket.
Hard to imagine that it's wrong - when have Australia ever collapsed like this in England? At least they made it to about 30 before the procession began at Headingley in 1981.
If Kids Company was providing all these services, what on earth was Southwark council doing? They're supposed to be the organisation providing services in that area.
Comments
I paraphrase, pro-EU people like Heath were only pro-EU because they were blackmailed into being Pro-EU because they are paedos.
Still it has been a good week for manufacturers of tin foil
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/05/convict-dead-defenceless-case-edward-heath
(I have seen it's in the Guardian. It's still a good read.)
O_o
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4518761.ece
http://labourlist.org/2015/08/why-weve-launched-the-labour-campaign-to-end-homelessness/
An article on Labour list about how homelessness is, in this age of austerity a terrible problem, and they need to have a policy to deal with this epidemic. I couldnt resist pointing out in the comments that homelessness is at an historically unusually low level, and substantially lower than what it was a decade ago, even with the mild uptick since the coalition took over in 2010.
When you are in a climate of tight resources, you have to use those resources in the most efficient way possible. Focusing on an issue that has already reduced by two thirds is maybe not where you should be looking.
Homelessness is much wider. (And there are parts of the homelessness regime which need a look at.)
Australia 1 change - Shaun Marsh replaces his brother.
Wood in for Anderson.
Both these attacks could leak runs very quickly. They're both led by experienced but mercurial bowlers, backed up by excellent pacemen who are inexperienced and lose line and length quickly under pressure, and two fairly ordinary spinners. England do though have five bowlers, Australia just four (it's even being said Voges might bowl if needed)!
Could be a very entertaining match, especially as I see Rogers has helpfully thrown away his wicket third ball.
What was that silly remark I made about it being reckless to bowl? He hasn't needed anyone at the other end yet!
(I haven't any tickets at all, by the way. It's just virtue signalling.)
Clarke will really appreciate the move from 4 to 5
Just saying.
THis is like watching the Windies in the glory days, when they were 15-5 after three overs.
What's the lowest score ever for Aus?
#daretodream
The one thing I still don't understand: what services exactly did this charity provide? What did it actually do?
Probably stuff that parents should be doing.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/514029.html
EDIT: what am I saying? Only about 3 men were the same. Shows how quickly Australia have had to change.
http://www.cricketsledges.com/viv-richards-and-sunil-gavaskar/
Even Jade Dernbach could take wickets on this pitch.
Will Cook declare at lunch or tea?
But let's not get carried away. Even on this pitch, Dernbach would surely get carted.
Yesterday's sale of RBS shares into the global financial crisis market, in the aftermath of the most intense point of the European sovereign debt crisis, in a low-interest rate environment, was a massive virtue signal about the "propriety" of privatisation, probably costing the taxpayer millions of pounds.
Edit - I know 'its neither good nor bad for Scotland that oil is $50/barrel'.....
That brings back happy memories.
The one thing I still don't understand: what services exactly did this charity provide? What did it actually do? What went on at its Camberwell premises? And are there really 6000 children in South London reliant on KC?
The "6000 kids have lost support" line could mean just that. But it's vague enough to encompass: we have a library here available to 6000 kids and if it closes they can't use it even though in fact only 38 kids actually use it or, if it closes, they can go to another library a bit further away.
The Guardian's editorial policy is "what can we publish today which might embarrass the Tories? And by the way, make sure the BBC have plenty of copies - they use us for their story board."
http://news.sky.com/story/1531085/plague-deaths-second-person-dies-in-colorado
This is astonishing. Any markets on whether Michael Clarke will resign mid-match to let someone else (Smith) explain the disaster to the press?
Excellent. Presumably this makes Liverpool Walton Hawaii?
'Why can't you tell the difference between 1% & 10%?'
'Yebbut oil prices, nobbut NHS Scotland waiting times, yebbut Police Scotland call centres, nobbut Salmonds tartan trews...' etc unto infinity.
In the fifth over...
Wasn't that the perceived wisdom not so long ago?
Still stunned by that score.
There is no way they should be 7-2 here.
'Australia need to try and get some sort of partnership going here.'
Frankly, it sounds a bit like Scientology to my ears when I read about *weekly supervisions* with staff. Camilla met 75 staff and 2 children over 9hrs over 2 days.
Everyone appears to get these from kids, to their parents to the staff:
- reflexology
- hypnotism
- massage [with the door unlocked]
- spa treatments
- manicures
- facials
- meals
- pocket money in brown envelops
- 73% of funds goes on staff, there appear to be more staff than children and a huge focus on labeling behaviour [that sounds pretty average] with -isms.
On Batman, she claims that she can barely read and can't do sums [despite being at boarding school from 11yrs], has 3 PAs, has never read a novel and can't drive or even open an ironing board.
Make of that what you will.
He hasn't mentioned his grandmother yet, but it can't be long.
It's important for fiction to be able to delve into grim areas, whether that's violence, sex, psychological pain or humour that is deemed to cross the line. It's one of various areas that makes me worried about freedom of speech given the bleating that comes from some quarters about how offended/upset they are.
As an aside, I have acquired a puppy. She has mastered the art of going outside twice, then urinating in the kitchen. The plus side of having had a large (30-35kg, circa 4st) dog that was prone to diarrhoea that took 1-2 hours to clean up is that puppy crap is like playing a videogame on easy when you've already beaten it on nightmare mode.
Where will the SNP go for policies now......
6 down.
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/629240486214025216
Poor shot from Clarke
I've laid the bejeesus out of them, see downthread.
Astonishing.
My remark about the wisdom of bowling first at the start looks more cretinous by the second.
Would have been nice if he had gone through his test career duck less
The pitch isn't doing much, confidence will be high and terrible for the Aussies. Even if they rescue this to say 150 you can see them repeating the same mistake in the second innings.
The one thing I still don't understand: what services exactly did this charity provide? What did it actually do? What went on at its Camberwell premises? And are there really 6000 children in South London reliant on KC?
The "6000 kids have lost support" line could mean just that. But it's vague enough to encompass: we have a library here available to 6000 kids and if it closes they can't use it even though in fact only 38 kids actually use it or, if it closes, they can go to another library a bit further away.
I'd assume that it is 'we've supported 6,000 kids in the last 20 years'...
At a time when funding for science research is under such severe strain what on earth are we doing spending taxpayers money to prove the bleedin' obvious and common knowledge?
Hard to imagine that it's wrong - when have Australia ever collapsed like this in England? At least they made it to about 30 before the procession began at Headingley in 1981.
I have a kitty with a runny bum that nothing will fix. Her favourite trick is going in the tray, then jumping on my knee/bed... I push her off, then she washes her tail...
The most moronic of which was a study that literally showed black is darker than white.
But this was the point I made at the outset: because the accusation of paedophilia is so toxic, and the belief that there is 'no smoke without fire' there is a very strong case of anonymity being preserved until, at least, court is reached.
What Wiltshire police did was disgraceful.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63291.html
One BILLION children!
Edited extra bit: good cricket comment from the BBC livefeed:
"Alex Norton: Are they... are they parodying us? It's method sledging."
Edit 56-1
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/629243675097350144