I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
I would need more - or some - evidence before accepting a link between leftwingery and sexual deviance.
I'm left wing btw.
It exists on the left and right of course but for copious evidence of the corruption of the left in America I suggest we review once the Epstein details come out. The right also have major problems in this regard - dennis Hastert for example.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
Good description of Labour moderates and Corbynistas.
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."
Good old Yeats. The earlier lines seem apt as well.
"Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold".
Could be the perfect description of our current party political system.
I'm on a tablet so I can't post the link, but there's a (deleted?) scene from Stone's "Nixon" where Sam Waterston/Richard Helms and Anthony Hopkins/Richard Nixon debate, and the poem is quoted. It's probably on YouTube. Watch out for the special effects bit when Helms's eyes (obscured by a fishtank) turn black.
I`m really tempted to stick a grand on Tories to get maj at 1.41. Can someone talk me out of it please?
I’m doing the same, and I lost money in 2017, maybe that will make you reconsider?
Is that a 410 return?
Yes, 41% return in a week. £1k down and £1410 back.
Well unless shagger is caught shagging in public it’s free money, is there any sniff of scandal in the air? It’s the only thing that can stop him.
Are you on it? You've been consistent with this line for weeks - but most models show a (to me uncomfortably) non-negligible chance of Corbyn as PM. It's far from a sure thimg yet.
One of the particularly disappointing aspects of remainers not accepting a democratic decision is how many of our limited pool of talent have thrown away their careers on this. I think Chuka has more to add than most of our MPs as of course did Rory Stewart and even Dominic Grieve and Letwin.
1) you might usefully reflect on why talented politicians should consciously risk their careers over Brexit. The answer, of course, is that these talented men and women believe it to be a disaster that they can’t acquiesce to.
Yes, for all we deride politicians as being gutless most of the time, and even though not everyone believes any Brexit is a disaster the way some do (and I still don't accept the praise of Grieve for anything other than his intellect), it is actually encouraging that quite a few MPs went agains their parties, even to the point of leaving or being kicked out, for what they thought was best. Agree with that judgement or not it is too rare that MPs do that, instead simply saying things to make themselves feel better, while actually doing nothing, be it on Brexit or something else. Frankly we should have seen a lot more of it.
It exists on the left and right of course but for copious evidence of the corruption of the left in America I suggest we review once the Epstein details come out. The right also have major problems in this regard - dennis Hastert for example.
Fair enough. I do wonder what you're reading though. I can monitor you on here, no problem, but I am not able to extend my purview beyond that.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis. This is the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the subject:
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Quite a high percentage of terrorists are recruited after involvement in mostly petty crime. Teenage males involved in petty crime are frequent cannabis users.
Cannabis does induce both a feckless apathy to any real achievement and also paranoia. That is fertile grounds for recruitment to Islamism. Islamism is quite effective at giving aimless losers a motivation in life. I am not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of using it. It is a very destructive drug, but in a rather more insidious way than alcohol or heroin.
I'm not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of cannabis use either. However they're not the same thing. Nothing about Islam is connected with cannabis use so far as I know.
I`m really tempted to stick a grand on Tories to get maj at 1.41. Can someone talk me out of it please?
I’m doing the same, and I lost money in 2017, maybe that will make you reconsider?
Is that a 410 return?
Yes, 41% return in a week. £1k down and £1410 back.
Well unless shagger is caught shagging in public it’s free money, is there any sniff of scandal in the air? It’s the only thing that can stop him.
It is very slow but I think we will be bombarded over the next 48 hours. I’d rather they were spread out though so we could digest them! Easy to pick and choose the ones you want when you get 6 polls in 4 hours.
Particularly enjoyed the woman trying to claim the offending passage in the book Jeremy, wrote the foreword for, was added after he wrote it. Despite being told it was in there when he first published 100 years ago. Genius.
Yes - she was as thick as mince, as well as nasty.
It is quite depressing the extent to which people will try to spin an excuse despite having no clue about what is going on and being in fact 100% wrong. Sometimes people get righteously angry when people challenge their clearly made up excuses too, sincerely angry despite being totally wrong. Everyone has tried that with half baked knowledged sometimes, but people try it even when they haven't even acquired all the ingredients in order to bake it!
It exists on the left and right of course but for copious evidence of the corruption of the left in America I suggest we review once the Epstein details come out. The right also have major problems in this regard - dennis Hastert for example.
Fair enough. I do wonder what you're reading though. I can monitor you on here, no problem, but I am not able to extend my purview beyond that.
Don't be a weirdo. What I read is my business, not yours.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Quite a high percentage of terrorists are recruited after involvement in mostly petty crime. Teenage males involved in petty crime are frequent cannabis users.
Cannabis does induce both a feckless apathy to any real achievement and also paranoia. That is fertile grounds for recruitment to Islamism. Islamism is quite effective at giving aimless losers a motivation in life. I am not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of using it. It is a very destructive drug, but in a rather more insidious way than alcohol or heroin.
I'm not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of cannabis use either. However they're not the same thing. Nothing about Islam is connected with cannabis use so far as I know.
I think often converts or radicalised Islamists have a background of usage, but may abstain after conversion.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
I see your point and to a certain extent seems to be the case. But we don't actually know what alcohol does to the brain over a period of a number of years iirc. There is certainly some evidence from scans/MRI etc etc that it does alter the brain structure, at least in heavy drinkers.
Why am I surprised that yet another leading Tory blatantly lied on a radio programme? I should be used to it by now but Sajid Javid's level of mendacity reached a new high this morning. Not only did he lie about the cause of the financial crash he also lied about homeless and rough sleeping figures.
We should all be very concerned about the character traits of some of the leading politicians who will have the power to affect our lives in the future.
Care to provide a link to what he said, and a link to what the actual numbers are?
The charity Shelter has confirmed that homelessness has not halved but has gone up since the Tories came to power.Rough sleepers are up by165% as quoted today by Dame Louise Casey who said the 'Javid lied and he shouldn't lie.'
On the same programme Javid returned to the false premise that the global financial crash was started by Labour. This quote should set the record straight.
Javid is spinning his former career as a sober investment banker, 'He was not a careful banker but a structured credit trader at the heart of the business that precipitated the global financial crash.' ( Former Deutsche Bank Colleague)
For many homeless people will the charity Shelter, provide shelter for this Christmas?
BBC fact checked Javids lie that Tories had brought it down in his interview with Rachel Burden this morning.
Concluded in drive tonight that there is no conceivable way that it was correct. It's either doubled tripled or quadrupled depending which of the 3 measures you use.
Tories had been contacted as to how they had made the figures up No response.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
One of the effects of alcohol is to make it increasingly unlikely that you are going to give up alcohol, so that's a Spartan if there. And it's uncontroversial that alcoholic brain damage is largely irreversible. There is no doubt that cannabis is in many ways a Bad Thing, but I don't think the debate about legalising it is interesting because it isn't going to make any difference - the skunk enthusiast will continue to buy skunk from his preferred dealer, because why would the fact that a different substance is available legally alter his buying habits?
If the anti-Semitism is that bad, why did Shami Chakrabarti?/ give Labour a clean bill of health. I think we should be told.
Interestingly there is a bit in the report about her deciding training on anti semitism not required because it would be ... I can't remember the exact word.. perhaps "condescending"?)
Seriously though read it and I think you will be shocked - not necessarily at the anti semitism but the internal stuff around it.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis. This is the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the subject:
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
Should we ban antidepressants as there is circumstantial evidence linking them to mass shootings? Or could it be that depressed loners who are likely to go on a killing spree are also more likely to be prescribed antidepressants?
Correlation is not causation, as I'm sure you know.
On the day of the 2017 election we were all wisely talking about how big May's majority would be. And mocking Survation.
No "WE" were not.
Indeed, I kept saying "there's no clear sign which way it's going to go, this could either be a massive majority or a hung parliament."
It depended on which bits of evidence you chose to believe. I thought, at the time, it depended on whether the surge in youth voter registrations meant that there would be a surge in youth voters actually voting.
I've got much more confidence this time though that Boris will win a small to moderate majority.
Great to see @BorisJohnson giving an interview to @thismorning after repeatedly promising to do @GMB. I do love a man who keeps his word, especially when he wants us to trust him to run the country. Thanks Boris! 👍👏👏 https://t.co/3z4aAwJeiG
Have you been drinking ?
I do not drink. Are you upset at all Boris's media appearances
I am becoming increasingly discomfited by your change in personality. Prior to your cruise you were a serious-minded if somewhat pompous elderly gentleman with a distinct speech pattern and a tendency towards overcapitalisation ("Party", "Country") who was so concerned about no-deal he left the party. After your cruise you have morphed into a Boris uber-loyalist who has rejoined the party despite the continued threat of No Deal and whose speech pattern is now noticeably different. Your post above is reminiscent of a younger man and is genuinely trolling.
What happened? Was that post an attack post sent out by Central Office and resent by you? Is your account shared with a younger relative? You do genuinely sound like a different person.
With the greatest of respect I do nobodies bidding and you simply do not know how greatly my opinions and management skills were respected by my staff and my peers so much so they appointed me to advise them on all aspects of compliance in new regulatory environmemts created by goverment legislation throughout the 80 and 90s and to liase with government departments and officials
I am my own person and people who know me would think you are uttering nonsense, probably because your particular political expectation is in peril
See? Now you are being mean again. It's unlike the previous version of you.
(And as for "my particular political expectation", you do know I placed a bet on Con Maj at 2/9, yes? I posted it on here).
To be honest I was not aware of your bet and I really do not want to be mean to anyone and sorry if I came over like that
My dislike of Corbyn transends everything else to be honest and I should say I have no Jewish connections at all, just horrible memories of the films coming out of the camps post war.
I have no great affection for Boris but we are where we are and if he wins a majority, takes us out of the EU by the 31st January, and then follows a one nation conservative consensus then I will be very pleased
I'm starting to lean towards the north and Midlands being about to do a Scotland 2015
Anyone who saw that CH 4 News focus group might agree. We could be looking at a bloodbath for Labour, which at least has the advantage that it should wipe Corbyn and co from leadership office.
Why am I surprised that yet another leading Tory blatantly lied on a radio programme? I should be used to it by now but Sajid Javid's level of mendacity reached a new high this morning. Not only did he lie about the cause of the financial crash he also lied about homeless and rough sleeping figures.
We should all be very concerned about the character traits of some of the leading politicians who will have the power to affect our lives in the future.
Care to provide a link to what he said, and a link to what the actual numbers are?
The charity Shelter has confirmed that homelessness has not halved but has gone up since the Tories came to power.Rough sleepers are up by165% as quoted today by Dame Louise Casey who said the 'Javid lied and he shouldn't lie.'
On the same programme Javid returned to the false premise that the global financial crash was started by Labour. This quote should set the record straight.
Javid is spinning his former career as a sober investment banker, 'He was not a careful banker but a structured credit trader at the heart of the business that precipitated the global financial crash.' ( Former Deutsche Bank Colleague)
For many homeless people will the charity Shelter, provide shelter for this Christmas?
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis. This is the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the subject:
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
Do you think that we are better off with a taxed and regulated system of selling drugs, or do you think that keeping them illegal reduces demand among the youth sufficiently to make society better off?
To what extent should we consider the opportunity cost, on society and the health service, of gangland violence related to control of the illegal drug trade? I believe it’s 250 murders in London in the past two years, plus many other shootings and stabbings.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis.
Should we ban antidepressants as there is circumstantial evidence linking them to mass shootings? Or could it be that depressed loners who are likely to go on a killing spree are also more likely to be prescribed antidepressants?
Correlation is not causation, as I'm sure you know.
The RCPsych believes the link to be causative not merely correlation. But what do they know of psychosis?
No, we should not ban anti-depressants, but we should be careful of indiscriminate usage. They can lift depression sufficiently to lift people out of stupor, but only to the point of taking action. Suicide and homicide can both feature at that point in recovery.
I am not opposed to decriminalisation of cannabis, just to its usage. There is a case that decriminalisation reduces usage by getting addicts into treatment, I am not convinced.
I think that both cannabis and mobile phones have a big part to play in our current mental health crisis.
Without overstating the impact of such clips, it is particularly effective, as whatever negatives there might be for Boris not answering such questions well, hearing them in a short, viral-ready 3 minute clip without rebuttal, is surely worse for him, and it is carefully played to not be shown as a requirement he attend, thereby making his refusal to do so seem pettier.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Quite a high percentage of terrorists are recruited after involvement in mostly petty crime. Teenage males involved in petty crime are frequent cannabis users.
Cannabis does induce both a feckless apathy to any real achievement and also paranoia. That is fertile grounds for recruitment to Islamism. Islamism is quite effective at giving aimless losers a motivation in life. I am not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of using it. It is a very destructive drug, but in a rather more insidious way than alcohol or heroin.
I'm not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of cannabis use either. However they're not the same thing. Nothing about Islam is connected with cannabis use so far as I know.
The point is that the terrorists aren't particularly religious.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis. This is the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the subject:
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
Should we ban antidepressants as there is circumstantial evidence linking them to mass shootings? Or could it be that depressed loners who are likely to go on a killing spree are also more likely to be prescribed antidepressants?
Correlation is not causation, as I'm sure you know.
I have cashed out on Skinner in Bolsover at slight profit.
Now only on Perkins in Chesterfield.
I think things have got worse for Labour locally in last 48 hrs.
Labour activists flooding Bolsover.
Definitely a toss up now I reckon.
It is interesting. The BBC goes to Croydon. The BBC being balanced (pass the sick bag), does its best to diss the Tories, by interviewing two voters voting Labour and LD and the third is introduced as a "Tory Party member" !!!!!
You get nothing really from TV. The only way you really find out what is really going to happen is by actually talking to people, and what is happening out there is NOT what is being reported on TV>
When Labour's last hope is Andrew Neil ... you know they're screwed
Well if you don’t want the questions AN posed answered by Johnson more fool you. This is not a game it’s not about my team and my mates getting elected it’s about getting the highly probable winner of the GE to put on the record what he is going to do. He should have no problem turning up and answering the questions unless he has something to hide or he lacks confidence in his own ability. You can make any excuse you like but there is no defense for him not doing it as was there was no defense for Corbyn and Johnson not turning up for the leaders debate.
It might help other PB posters, readers, contributors and thread writers with their planning on election night. When to celebrate defeat of Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn or those special moments when a minister or shadow minister is surprisingly searching for alternative employment on December 13th.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Connecting terrorism and cannabis is not at all odd
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis. This is the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the subject:
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
Do you think that we are better off with a taxed and regulated system of selling drugs, or do you think that keeping them illegal reduces demand among the youth sufficiently to make society better off?
To what extent should we consider the opportunity cost, on society and the health service, of gangland violence related to control of the illegal drug trade? I believe it’s 250 murders in London in the past two years, plus many other shootings and stabbings.
I don't think the government should become drug pushers just because it is profitable. That is the politics of Capone.
I favour keeping drugs illegal, but with civil penalties for usage (criminal for dealing) and with mandatory treatment similar to speed awareness courses to avoid fines. It stops youngsters from getting criminal records that will cast long shadows over their lives.
Though I like scrutiny of the big politicians from a strategic point of view avoiding Neil looks a great call given Bozza’s potential for gaffes under pressure. People notice if you skip the big debates like May did but the public don’t care about Andrew Neil outside the twittersphere. This is a shame as the Neil interviews are far more entertaining than the debates but are nowhere near as hyped nor is Neil watched by those who are non political aficionados.
The rise in Labour polling appeared to flatline somewhat after the Neil interview went viral, perhaps if it were not for that their IV would still be climbing.
A pompous arse high on his own supply. Why does talking to Andrew Marr not constitute talking to the BBC? And, much more importantly, if Neil is so bloody clever why did he not drop big enough hints to Labour about arrangements for interviews that they would have twigged that they should be asking for a written undertaking from the tories before making Corbyn available? Johnson has behaved disgracefully, obvs, but let's not elevate a bullying windbag into a Living National Treasure.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Quite a high percentage of terrorists are recruited after involvement in mostly petty crime. Teenage males involved in petty crime are frequent cannabis users.
Cannabis does induce both a feckless apathy to any real achievement and also paranoia. That is fertile grounds for recruitment to Islamism. Islamism is quite effective at giving aimless losers a motivation in life. I am not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of using it. It is a very destructive drug, but in a rather more insidious way than alcohol or heroin.
I'm not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of cannabis use either. However they're not the same thing. Nothing about Islam is connected with cannabis use so far as I know.
The point is that the terrorists aren't particularly religious.
Perhaps so, but where was that point made below? Your new point may be that terrorists aren't particularly religious, but don't dress it up as something that I've missed. I can miss things and get things wrong very well without your help!
I guess he’ll do it on Monday, when only a small audience will be watching, and the postal votes will mostly be in the bag?
Why bother now? If there’s a hit to be taken, he’ll take it from that monologue anyway (I don’t think there is one). If it’s raised tomorrow night then he’ll just say “I’m live on BBC1 on a Friday night being probed by the great Nick Robinson - what more do you want?”
Great to see @BorisJohnson giving an interview to @thismorning after repeatedly promising to do @GMB. I do love a man who keeps his word, especially when he wants us to trust him to run the country. Thanks Boris! 👍👏👏 https://t.co/3z4aAwJeiG
Have you been drinking ?
Boris is running scared of Piers Morgan (whose tweet it was) as well as Julie Etchingham and Andrew Neil.
The point is he is doing plenty of media appearances
It is only activists who are so exercised over Boris and AN
G, he is picking patsies only so his constant lying is not challenged, hard to believe we have ever had the likes of this as PM previously. His ministers are little better, it is absolutely shocking.
This may well be a very strong but inherently uninteresting correlation, though. Look at UK football hooliganism as a parallel: alcohol is an absolutely integral part of the culture, but nobody seriously doubts these people would be equally nasty little shits without it.
There is a massive difference between alcohol use and that of cannabis which people don't seem to understand; if you give up alcohol, its effect on the mind wears off to a great degree, but smoking cannabis for a year or two can alter the mind forever.
Particularly as teenagers, it can lead to a life of psychosis. This is the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the subject:
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
Do you think that we are better off with a taxed and regulated system of selling drugs, or do you think that keeping them illegal reduces demand among the youth sufficiently to make society better off?
To what extent should we consider the opportunity cost, on society and the health service, of gangland violence related to control of the illegal drug trade? I believe it’s 250 murders in London in the past two years, plus many other shootings and stabbings.
I don't think the government should become drug pushers just because it is profitable. That is the politics of Capone.
I favour keeping drugs illegal, but with civil penalties for usage (criminal for dealing) and with mandatory treatment similar to speed awareness courses to avoid fines. It stops youngsters from getting criminal records that will cast long shadows over their lives.
Interesting viewpoint, thanks for replying as it wasn’t one I’d considered before.
I guess he’ll do it on Monday, when only a small audience will be watching, and the postal votes will mostly be in the bag?
I would only do it if the pressure gets too much. The Neil uproar by a selection of the public who won’t vote Tory was a small issue over a week ago, it may well return but given we are only 6 days from polling you would expect other events to dominate the news and his Neil dodging to return to being a minority pursuit. If it has major traction that continues into the weekend then you’d consider it but otherwise just throw a dead cat and let twitter froth in isolation.
That AN clip is utterly damning, who in their right mind can give that man the keys to no 10.
People here may hate Corbyn, but clearly any Tory majority is not a risk worth taking and those that can't stomach either have to find a way to force a hung parliament.
A pompous arse high on his own supply. Why does talking to Andrew Marr not constitute talking to the BBC? And, much more importantly, if Neil is so bloody clever why did he not drop big enough hints to Labour about arrangements for interviews that they would have twigged that they should be asking for a written undertaking from the tories before making Corbyn available? Johnson has behaved disgracefully, obvs, but let's not elevate a bullying windbag into a Living National Treasure.
Why am I surprised that yet another leading Tory blatantly lied on a radio programme? I should be used to it by now but Sajid Javid's level of mendacity reached a new high this morning. Not only did he lie about the cause of the financial crash he also lied about homeless and rough sleeping figures.
We should all be very concerned about the character traits of some of the leading politicians who will have the power to affect our lives in the future.
Care to provide a link to what he said, and a link to what the actual numbers are?
The charity Shelter has confirmed that homelessness has not halved but has gone up since the Tories came to power.Rough sleepers are up by165% as quoted today by Dame Louise Casey who said the 'Javid lied and he shouldn't lie.'
On the same programme Javid returned to the false premise that the global financial crash was started by Labour. This quote should set the record straight.
Javid is spinning his former career as a sober investment banker, 'He was not a careful banker but a structured credit trader at the heart of the business that precipitated the global financial crash.' ( Former Deutsche Bank Colleague)
Homelessness is half what it was before the crash.
I have cashed out on Skinner in Bolsover at slight profit.
Now only on Perkins in Chesterfield.
I think things have got worse for Labour locally in last 48 hrs.
Labour activists flooding Bolsover.
Definitely a toss up now I reckon.
It is interesting. The BBC goes to Croydon. The BBC being balanced (pass the sick bag), does its best to diss the Tories, by interviewing two voters voting Labour and LD and the third is introduced as a "Tory Party member" !!!!!
You get nothing really from TV. The only way you really find out what is really going to happen is by actually talking to people, and what is happening out there is NOT what is being reported on TV>
Most people only talk within their own echo chamber and believe silence means agreement with a view point. Politics is so poisoned now most people aren’t willing to risk anymore relationships over party politics, the referendum has caused enormous caverns between friends and family. I just shut up is someone try’s pushing a political point until they finish and ask them to change the subject.
I guess he’ll do it on Monday, when only a small audience will be watching, and the postal votes will mostly be in the bag?
I would only do it if the pressure gets too much. The Neil uproar by a selection of the public who won’t vote Tory was a small issue over a week ago, it may well return but given we are only 6 days from polling you would expect other events to dominate the news and his Neil dodging to return to being a minority pursuit. If it has major traction that continues into the weekend then you’d consider it but otherwise just throw a dead cat and let twitter froth in isolation.
And, of course, Boris now knows the questions he will face. If he thinks he can prepare answers for them then my guess is he will do the interview on Wednesday night.
It might help other PB posters, readers, contributors and thread writers with their planning on election night. When to celebrate defeat of Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn or those special moments when a minister or shadow minister is surprisingly searching for alternative employment on December 13th.
There is c. 4 hour wait before the fund starts.
Workington at 1am. Given its profile earlier in the election, if that goes blue it will presumably be “Nuneaton” for the media.
Why am I surprised that yet another leading Tory blatantly lied on a radio programme? I should be used to it by now but Sajid Javid's level of mendacity reached a new high this morning. Not only did he lie about the cause of the financial crash he also lied about homeless and rough sleeping figures.
We should all be very concerned about the character traits of some of the leading politicians who will have the power to affect our lives in the future.
Care to provide a link to what he said, and a link to what the actual numbers are?
The charity Shelter has confirmed that homelessness has not halved but has gone up since the Tories came to power.Rough sleepers are up by165% as quoted today by Dame Louise Casey who said the 'Javid lied and he shouldn't lie.'
On the same programme Javid returned to the false premise that the global financial crash was started by Labour. This quote should set the record straight.
Javid is spinning his former career as a sober investment banker, 'He was not a careful banker but a structured credit trader at the heart of the business that precipitated the global financial crash.' ( Former Deutsche Bank Colleague)
For many homeless people will the charity Shelter, provide shelter for this Christmas?
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Quite a high percentage of terrorists are recruited after involvement in mostly petty crime. Teenage males involved in petty crime are frequent cannabis users.
Cannabis does induce both a feckless apathy to any real achievement and also paranoia. That is fertile grounds for recruitment to Islamism. Islamism is quite effective at giving aimless losers a motivation in life. I am not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of using it. It is a very destructive drug, but in a rather more insidious way than alcohol or heroin.
I'm not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of cannabis use either. However they're not the same thing. Nothing about Islam is connected with cannabis use so far as I know.
The point is that the terrorists aren't particularly religious.
Perhaps so, but where was that point made below? Your new point may be that terrorists aren't particularly religious, but don't dress it up as something that I've missed. I can miss things and get things wrong very well without your help!
I'm not dressing anything up. I am quoting/linking to Peter Hitchens who has long said that the terrorists arent religious, but psychiatrically challenged due to drug use
It might help other PB posters, readers, contributors and thread writers with their planning on election night. When to celebrate defeat of Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn or those special moments when a minister or shadow minister is surprisingly searching for alternative employment on December 13th.
There is c. 4 hour wait before the fund starts.
Workington at 1am. Given its profile earlier in the election, if that goes blue it will presumably be “Nuneaton” for the media.
I should know someone at the count... Might be worth a massive betting opportunity as soon as it becomes clear what's happening.
It might help other PB posters, readers, contributors and thread writers with their planning on election night. When to celebrate defeat of Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn or those special moments when a minister or shadow minister is surprisingly searching for alternative employment on December 13th.
There is c. 4 hour wait before the fund starts.
Hmm. I’m still not sure where I’m going to be on election night, but it will either be Dubai (+4 hours) or Manila (+8 hours). Maybe a 10pm UK time alarm to check the exit poll, then a few hours’ sleep until things start happening.
It bounces around. You can get an idea of the longer term trend at betdata.io (inverted into probabilities), though you need an account to zoom in and get any real detail.
I guess he’ll do it on Monday, when only a small audience will be watching, and the postal votes will mostly be in the bag?
I would only do it if the pressure gets too much. The Neil uproar by a selection of the public who won’t vote Tory was a small issue over a week ago, it may well return but given we are only 6 days from polling you would expect other events to dominate the news and his Neil dodging to return to being a minority pursuit. If it has major traction that continues into the weekend then you’d consider it but otherwise just throw a dead cat and let twitter froth in isolation.
And, of course, Boris now knows the questions he will face. If he thinks he can prepare answers for them then my guess is he will do the interview on Wednesday night.
Wednesday would be a risk, fresh in the minds of viewers. Ultimately as has been said it’s very easy for him tomorrow to say “here I am on BBC1 with Nick Robinson, I’ve done Marr, Peston, debates, Q &As from the public, I couldn’t fit in some of the invites because I’ve been busy meeting world leaders at the NATO Summit here in the UK as part of my duty as Prime Minister and I’ve been meeting the Great British public up and down the country.”
It’s not a good look for other journalists to point out Neill is far better than they are at scrutinising politicians and I think a lot of the public will wonder why anyone would think this particular interview is so important.
I have a hunch that Peter Hitchens is probably right about cannabis. The problem is that the "zeitgeit" says cannabis is okay and tobacco is not okay.
He is right. It is truly amazing how wilfully blind people are on this subject. They can’t know many people that have done it if they think it’s a safe drug.
I think it's almost the oposite: they know lots of people who did itback when it was a much less scary drug. And haven't appreciated how things have changed.
Having tried the odd joint in my younger days, I tried cannabis again in 2007. I have never been so utterly disorientated. I was fortunate that I had enough friends around me to prevent an seriously poor decisions being made. But I can easily see how very bad things can happen.
Connecting terrorism and cannabis use though is a bit odd. He probably did many entirely normal things. You wouldn't say 'Surprise! He ate chips!' would you.
I doubt all terrorists use cannabis, and I'm damn sure all cannabis users are not terrorists. Almost all terrorists eat chips though....
Quite a high percentage of terrorists are recruited after involvement in mostly petty crime. Teenage males involved in petty crime are frequent cannabis users.
Cannabis does induce both a feckless apathy to any real achievement and also paranoia. That is fertile grounds for recruitment to Islamism. Islamism is quite effective at giving aimless losers a motivation in life. I am not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of using it. It is a very destructive drug, but in a rather more insidious way than alcohol or heroin.
I'm not at all surprised that many terrorists have a history of cannabis use either. However they're not the same thing. Nothing about Islam is connected with cannabis use so far as I know.
The point is that the terrorists aren't particularly religious.
Perhaps so, but where was that point made below? Your new point may be that terrorists aren't particularly religious, but don't dress it up as something that I've missed. I can miss things and get things wrong very well without your help!
I'm not dressing anything up. I am quoting/linking to Peter Hitchens who has long said that the terrorists arent religious, but psychiatrically challenged due to drug use
Comments
https://twitter.com/PaulDMiller2/status/803057810581946368?s=19
The right also have major problems in this regard - dennis Hastert for example.
It is a common myth that the word assassin comes from the Arabic word haschishin for hashish user."
https://www.alamut.com/subj/ideologies/alamut/etymolAss.html
You've been consistent with this line for weeks - but most models show a (to me uncomfortably) non-negligible chance of Corbyn as PM. It's far from a sure thimg yet.
Bloody hell - Even worse than I expected.
This guy has a point too
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/05/jews-canary-coal-mine-comes-labours-treatment-anyone-would-dare/
https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mental-health/parents-and-young-people/young-people/cannabis-and-mental-health-information-for-young-people
I think it legitimate to consider whether decriminalisation may reduce usage, but this is a toxic drug. I have seen too many lives wasted by it both in my professional life and my friends to consider it benign.
Ffs Matlock is in a Tory seat lol
Concluded in drive tonight that there is no conceivable way that it was correct. It's either doubled tripled or quadrupled depending which of the 3 measures you use.
Tories had been contacted as to how they had made the figures up No response.
Seriously though read it and I think you will be shocked - not necessarily at the anti semitism but the internal stuff around it.
Correlation is not causation, as I'm sure you know.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/07/25/antidepressants-linked-murders-murderous-thoughts/
It depended on which bits of evidence you chose to believe. I thought, at the time, it depended on whether the surge in youth voter registrations meant that there would be a surge in youth voters actually voting.
I've got much more confidence this time though that Boris will win a small to moderate majority.
So there we go - 64 seat majority.
Now only on Perkins in Chesterfield.
I think things have got worse for Labour locally in last 48 hrs.
Labour activists flooding Bolsover.
Definitely a toss up now I reckon.
Great stuff!
My dislike of Corbyn transends everything else to be honest and I should say I have no Jewish connections at all, just horrible memories of the films coming out of the camps post war.
I have no great affection for Boris but we are where we are and if he wins a majority, takes us out of the EU by the 31st January, and then follows a one nation conservative consensus then I will be very pleased
And it hardly came from a Trot.
Andrew the actual legend
When Saj tried the same lie she said everybody is laughing at you I thought you were supposed to be good with numbers. He wasnt pleased.
Then he repeated the Labour caused the crash lie. Burden said most people know it was a global recession caused by banks like the one you worked for.
Cracking interview. BBC will likely sack her.
To what extent should we consider the opportunity cost, on society and the health service, of gangland violence related to control of the illegal drug trade? I believe it’s 250 murders in London in the past two years, plus many other shootings and stabbings.
https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/12/05/the-tories-are-well-ahead-in-wrexham-part-of-labours-red-wall
No, we should not ban anti-depressants, but we should be careful of indiscriminate usage. They can lift depression sufficiently to lift people out of stupor, but only to the point of taking action. Suicide and homicide can both feature at that point in recovery.
I am not opposed to decriminalisation of cannabis, just to its usage. There is a case that decriminalisation reduces usage by getting addicts into treatment, I am not convinced.
I think that both cannabis and mobile phones have a big part to play in our current mental health crisis.
You get nothing really from TV. The only way you really find out what is really going to happen is by actually talking to people, and what is happening out there is NOT what is being reported on TV>
EDIT Nearby seats: Flavible has Labour winning Chester by 1% - gone
Wirral South by 3% - gone
Ellesmere Port and Neston by 5% - gone.......
I guess he’ll do it on Monday, when only a small audience will be watching, and the postal votes will mostly be in the bag?
https://election.pressassociation.com/general-election/estimated-declaration-times-by-time/
It might help other PB posters, readers, contributors and thread writers with their planning on election night. When to celebrate defeat of Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn or those special moments when a minister or shadow minister is surprisingly searching for alternative employment on December 13th.
There is c. 4 hour wait before the fund starts.
I favour keeping drugs illegal, but with civil penalties for usage (criminal for dealing) and with mandatory treatment similar to speed awareness courses to avoid fines. It stops youngsters from getting criminal records that will cast long shadows over their lives.
The rise in Labour polling appeared to flatline somewhat after the Neil interview went viral, perhaps if it were not for that their IV would still be climbing.
£30,000 wanting to back or 1.4 or 1.41.
After that, I think the clock has run down.
His ministers are little better, it is absolutely shocking.
People here may hate Corbyn, but clearly any Tory majority is not a risk worth taking and those that can't stomach either have to find a way to force a hung parliament.
Hasn't it been about that for days
It bounces around. You can get an idea of the longer term trend at betdata.io (inverted into probabilities), though you need an account to zoom in and get any real detail.
It’s not a good look for other journalists to point out Neill is far better than they are at scrutinising politicians and I think a lot of the public will wonder why anyone would think this particular interview is so important.