This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Almost certainly protected I would think. Especially given it's a Grade 1 listed building.
Note that the listing specifically mentions the statue.
It's also interesting that one of the reasons for the listing is "Strong connection with the British slave trade adds to historical interest of buildings, the warehouses having been built for the express purpose of receiving goods produced by slaves on West Indian plantations."
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
Really? So if I don't laugh at a Shakespearean comedy it's not that it's hundreds of years old and perhaps not as guffaw worthy as it was then, it's simply no longer a comedy?
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Churchill was not a fascist, but he was no anti-fascist either. Many British men and women gave their lives fighting a war against a fascist regime in Spain which Churchill never had the slightest problem with. The support of most of the British right wing for the eventual war effort against Germany had zero to do with a fight against fascism or against national socialism - otherwise they would have supported the anti-fascist side in the war in Spain.
Then there was Churchill's notoriously nutcase anti-Semitic article in 1920.
Personally I can never forget that Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
Really? So if I don't laugh at a Shakespearean comedy it's not that it's hundreds of years old and perhaps not as guffaw worthy as it was then, it's simply no longer a comedy?
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
Was it Khan's doing, though? The Guardian article says:
The statue of slave owner Robert Milligan at West India Quay in London’s Docklands was removed using a JCB, after the charity which owns the land where it stood promised to organise its “safe removal” following a petition launched by Ehtasham Haque.
The local council, Tower Hamlets, said it had removed the statue and had “also announced a review into monuments and other sites in our borough to understand how we should represent the more troubling periods in our history”.
.. which seems to be rather incoherent, but doesn't say that Khan ordered the deplinthing,
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Churchill was not a fascist, but he was no anti-fascist either. Many British men and women gave their lives fighting a war against a fascist regime in Spain which Churchill never had the slightest problem with. The support of most of the British right wing for the eventual war effort against Germany had zero to do with a fight against fascism or against national socialism - otherwise they would have supported the anti-fascist side in the war in Spain.
Then there was Churchill's notoriously nutcase anti-Semitic article in 1920.
Personally I can never forget that Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.
And being born in a palace matters because? The other stuff you mention I get, but what does his birthplace have to do with anything?
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...
Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? is timelessly brilliant.
It is one of the exceptions, like Fawlty Towers.
Not many others though. Who watches Bread or the Liver Birds now?
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Churchill was not a fascist, but he was no anti-fascist either. Many British men and women gave their lives fighting a war against a fascist regime in Spain which Churchill never had the slightest problem with. The support of most of the British right wing for the eventual war effort against Germany had zero to do with a fight against fascism or against national socialism - otherwise they would have supported the anti-fascist side in the war in Spain.
Then there was Churchill's notoriously nutcase anti-Semitic article in 1920.
Personally I can never forget that Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.
Bullshit. Churchill did more to challenge the fascists on the political stage than practically any other politician of the era. He was arguing against Hitler and fascism whilst Stalin was in the process of signing pacts and supporting the German invasion of Poland.
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...
Robert Peel was the person who insisted the police shouldn't be armed. If the protestors start targetting statues of him it really would be ridiculous.
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
Maybe. I doubt it.
But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets
A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
I don't think there will be violence in the streets defending statues of some people. Resistance, I am sure, so I don't think Churchill for instance is in danger within 3 years, but the 'must fall' people are just more determined and driven. Take out a few by vandalism and, due to the target, watch them not get replaced. Watch others then get removed as a precaution against vandalism. Then see vandalism against more 'mainstream' figures, and cries of it going too far, maybe replacing those ones. But they'll be back. They want it so much more, and are so righteous.
Oh yes, I quite agree.
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity."
From the Second Coming by Yeats, which was, inter alia, written in reaction to his wife nearly dying in the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918
But in the end these convulsive movements do suddenly and brutally collapse - in general. Look at ISIS, or the French Terror, or the Cultural Revolution. There's a cycle of growing wildness and weirdness, than an abrupt end. And the extremists left at the end usually come to a sticky conclusion.
Let us hope that the UK's conclusion is legal and political, jail time maybe, and not street thuggery and physical revenge (which I fear is highly possible)
Tommy Robinson is leading an EDL march in London on Saturday, I hope it does not get violent
Surely there is some kind of psychological term for this? Snap back? One week everyone is cowering in their homes terrified of dying of the plague and demanding their government lock them down.
Next it is open warfare on the streets, mass protests, marches...
A statue of Yaxley-Lennon would be far less dangerous than the vile live version.
Robert Peel was the person who insisted the police shouldn't be armed. If the protestors start targetting statues of him it really would be ridiculous.
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...
Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? is timelessly brilliant.
It is one of the exceptions, like Fawlty Towers.
Not many others though. Who watches Bread or the Liver Birds now?
Fools and Horses, Dad's Army, Yes Minister/ Prime Minister ......
Meanwhile, is Trump exempt from civil suit for what he does while in office that might otherwise be tortious? He is careful to use the words "appearing" and "could be" in his Buffalo tweet, but he also writes "(H)e fell harder than was pushed" and "Was aiming scanner" which appear to amount to direct accusations of dishonesty and criminality against Mr Gugino.
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
I thought you were Cornish?
I have no idea where you got that insane idea. I am a proud son of Royal Penarth, and no mistake
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
I thought you were Cornish?
Eadric the Wild is from the Welsh Marches, famed I believe for liberating the City of Hereford.. Saxty's wine bar and the Cherry Rooms were like a warzone after a visit from Eadric.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Almost certainly protected I would think. Especially given it's a Grade 1 listed building.
Note that the listing specifically mentions the statue.
It's also interesting that one of the reasons for the listing is "Strong connection with the British slave trade adds to historical interest of buildings, the warehouses having been built for the express purpose of receiving goods produced by slaves on West Indian plantations."
That's so enraging. The statue was there to educate on slavery. Deliberately left in its slaving context, and acknowledged as such: like a Nazi camp still standing in Poland.
This is not Colston in Bristol. This is not "veneration of a slaver". This is a bid to educate the passer by on why those impressive docks are there, and why they were so successful, because Empire, trade, slavery. Any inquiring human could look at the statue, have a question, go into the museum, and then learn. This was Britain being honest, the opposite of celebration.
Tearing it down is the act of angry infants, who want more sugar. I despise them.
How long will it be before the names "West India Quay", "East India Dock", "Royal Victoria", "Prince Regent", "King George V", "Royal Albert" are deemed to be offensive?
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
The Poles, Balts, East Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Albanians and Yugoslavs might quibble a little about their portion of European civilisation being saved. Still, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
I thought you were Cornish?
I have no idea where you got that insane idea. I am a proud son of Royal Penarth, and no mistake
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
I thought you were Cornish?
Eadric the Wild is from the Welsh Marches, famed I believe for liberating the City of Hereford.. Saxty's wine bar and the Cherry Rooms were like a warzone after a visit from Eadric.
I heard he had been deported to Hereford after the Welsh caught him drinking cider...
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
The Poles, Balts, East Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Albanians and Yugoslavs might quibble a little about their portion of European civilisation being saved. Still, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Wasn't exactly Churchill's fault though was it, considering the only way to stop it would have been to attack one of our allies.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
I thought you were Cornish?
Eadric the Wild is from the Welsh Marches, famed I believe for liberating the City of Hereford.. Saxty's wine bar and the Cherry Rooms were like a warzone after a visit from Eadric.
I heard he had been deported to Hereford after the Welsh caught him drinking cider...
Eadric was an ancient. Mercian (I believe) 'king', presumably keeping the Welsh under control.
Holy Jesus. More Americans killed in Chicago than Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
The murder rate in Chicago has been going down for the last 3 years, and was actually very low this year until a few weeks ago. So this is disappointing.
Basement boy is worried about 'former' kings now. I'd imagine Leo is only former in the sense that being a currently dead king means that he's a former live king.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
I'll fucking challenge it, if I have to. I loathe Khan with every atom of my immortal Welsh soul
I thought you were Cornish?
I have no idea where you got that insane idea. I am a proud son of Royal Penarth, and no mistake
Maybe I mistook you for a character in a novel
Is the novel good, bad or indifferent?
It was about a super-hero who attempts all sorts of thrilling derring-do to woo the ladies, but he was made redundant when Milk Tray was replaced by Prosecco and then started up a cider bar in Hereford. Allegedly...
Basement boy is worried about 'former' kings now. I'd imagine Leo is only former in the sense that being a currently dead king means that he's a former live king.
... Tearing it down is the act of angry infants, who want more sugar. I despise them.
In that case Liverpool is in real trouble. It was practically built on the back of slave trade and sugar industries.
Can they still keep the statue of Bill Shankly?
Perhaps old soldiers, old colonials and politicians is always a bad idea for a statue. I love that in order to remember the witch trials in Salem they have a statue of Elizabeth Montgomery (Samantha from Bewitched).
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...
Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? is timelessly brilliant.
It is one of the exceptions, like Fawlty Towers.
Not many others though. Who watches Bread or the Liver Birds now?
Fools and Horses, Dad's Army, Yes Minister/ Prime Minister ......
Only Fools won't get shown much in the future, very problematic
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Almost certainly protected I would think. Especially given it's a Grade 1 listed building.
Note that the listing specifically mentions the statue.
It's also interesting that one of the reasons for the listing is "Strong connection with the British slave trade adds to historical interest of buildings, the warehouses having been built for the express purpose of receiving goods produced by slaves on West Indian plantations."
That's so enraging. The statue was there to educate on slavery. Deliberately left in its slaving context, and acknowledged as such: like a Nazi camp still standing in Poland.
This is not Colston in Bristol. This is not "veneration of a slaver". This is a bid to educate the passer by on why those impressive docks are there, and why they were so successful, because Empire, trade, slavery. Any inquiring human could look at the statue, have a question, go into the museum, and then learn. This was Britain being honest, the opposite of celebration.
Tearing it down is the act of angry infants, who want more sugar. I despise them.
How long will it be before the names "West India Quay", "East India Dock", "Royal Victoria", "Prince Regent", "King George V", "Royal Albert" are deemed to be offensive?
The existence of the docklands will be offensive, let alone the names
Cultural war is here well and truly. This will end badly.
It will for the Union.
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
The Poles, Balts, East Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Albanians and Yugoslavs might quibble a little about their portion of European civilisation being saved. Still, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Wasn't exactly Churchill's fault though was it, considering the only way to stop it would have been to attack one of our allies.
Sure, but a grubby alliance which often involved fulsome praise from Churchill regarding Stalin should probably not be extolled as saving European civilisation from barbarism, particularly as Churchill and the British people weren't the ones paying the ultimate bill for that alliance.
Perhaps old soldiers, old colonials and politicians is always a bad idea for a statue. I love that in order to remember the witch trials in Salem they have a statue of Elizabeth Montgomery (Samantha from Bewitched).
She was wonderful and I loved that programme. Thank you for telling me that.
Holy Jesus. More Americans killed in Chicago than Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
The murder rate in Chicago has been going down for the last 3 years, and was actually very low this year until a few weeks ago. So this is disappointing.
It's since 2001. St Louis the most dangerous city noe
Cultural war is here well and truly. This will end badly.
It will for the Union.
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
Complete and utter rubbish.
The latest polling still has Yes below 50% despite Brexit, fighting for the Union.not Wokeism is the best way to defeat Nats.
Of course there is also the delicious spectacle of Nats tearing themselves apart in a civil war over transgender rights for Unionists to enjoy
Cultural war is here well and truly. This will end badly.
It will for the Union.
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
Complete and utter rubbish.
The latest polling still has Yes below 50% despite Brexit, fighting for the Union.not Wokeism is the best way to defeat Nats.
Of course there is also the delicious spectacle of Nats tearing themselves apart in a civil war over transgender rights for Unionists to enjoy
Speaking of delicious, how's the Unionist majority at Holyrood thing going?
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 53% (n/c) Conservatives 21% (-2) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 6% (+1) Greens 3% (n/c)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
SNP 48% (n/c) Conservatives 19% (-3) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 8% (+2) Greens 7% (n/c)
Seats projection: SNP 72 (+9), Conservatives 25 (-6), Labour 19 (-5), Liberal Democrats 8 (+3), Greens 5 (-1)
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
True, the SNP at the time were rather keener on Mr Hitler's vision of Europe.
Do you really want us to list all the 1930s Tories sympathetic to, and in some cases supportive of, Hitler? The list is long.
There were the masses ranks of Tory appeasers, a significant chunk of Tory fascists, and the flank of white-supremacist Churchill supporters. Was there any wing of the 1930s Tory party that was not utterly repulsive?
I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.
In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
But you obviously remember them well.
Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.
A lot of comedy dates very badly.
The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.
A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
How’d we know? The BBC suppressed The Goodies for so long most people simply forgot about them.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
True, the SNP at the time were rather keener on Mr Hitler's vision of Europe.
Do you really want us to list all the 1930s Tories sympathetic to, and in some cases supportive of, Hitler? The list is long.
There were the masses ranks of Tory appeasers, a significant chunk of Tory fascists, and the flank of white-supremacist Churchill supporters. Was there any wing of the 1930s Tory party that was not utterly repulsive?
Tbf. Churchill was reasonably sound and consistent on this issue.
Did YouGov list the options in the order Government/Public/Both/Neither for all respondents?
My answer to "If there's a second wave, would you blame the government or the public?" would be "Neither". It's not as if there wasn't some level of preparedness against an epidemic already, and yet the virus got through. Viruses are pesky blighters. I wouldn't blame either the government or the "public" for this virus coming back for a second lethal attack as in 1918, possibly significantly mutated and with higher mortality in some demographics.
Sure, the government and the "public" might play a part, but I probably won't have the information to form much of an opinion on that.
If the pollster did use only the stated order, perhaps "Neither" would have beaten 4% had it been listed first?
Cultural war is here well and truly. This will end badly.
It will for the Union.
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
Complete and utter rubbish.
The latest polling still has Yes below 50% despite Brexit, fighting for the Union.not Wokeism is the best way to defeat Nats.
Of course there is also the delicious spectacle of Nats tearing themselves apart in a civil war over transgender rights for Unionists to enjoy
Speaking of delicious, how's the Unionist majority at Holyrood thing going?
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 53% (n/c) Conservatives 21% (-2) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 6% (+1) Greens 3% (n/c)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
SNP 48% (n/c) Conservatives 19% (-3) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 8% (+2) Greens 7% (n/c)
Seats projection: SNP 72 (+9), Conservatives 25 (-6), Labour 19 (-5), Liberal Democrats 8 (+3), Greens 5 (-1)
Plenty of time to go yet, let us not forget May had big leads until polling day in 2017 too.
The SNP got 46% in 2016, it only takes them and the Greens to lose a few percent and they lose their Nationalist majority under the PR system used at Holyrood
I call bollocks. Teaming up with the PRC is not "wokery". It is, and always has been, a pursuit of profit over morality.
A lot of these big brands who have been doing their BLM stuff on social media, while over the recent past happy to do even more than just ignore issues in China e.g. the NBA sanctioned team staff, players and fans who raised the issue of Hong Kong and made them do PR saying how great China was.
I call bollocks. Teaming up with the PRC is not "wokery". It is, and always has been, a pursuit of profit over morality.
A lot of these big brands who have been doing their BLM stuff on social media, while over the recent past happy to do even more than just ignore issues in China e.g. the NBA sanctioned team staff, players and fans who raised the issue of Hong Kong and made them do PR saying how great China was.
Cultural war is here well and truly. This will end badly.
It will for the Union.
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
Complete and utter rubbish.
The latest polling still has Yes below 50% despite Brexit, fighting for the Union.not Wokeism is the best way to defeat Nats.
Of course there is also the delicious spectacle of Nats tearing themselves apart in a civil war over transgender rights for Unionists to enjoy
Speaking of delicious, how's the Unionist majority at Holyrood thing going?
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 53% (n/c) Conservatives 21% (-2) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 6% (+1) Greens 3% (n/c)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
SNP 48% (n/c) Conservatives 19% (-3) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 8% (+2) Greens 7% (n/c)
Seats projection: SNP 72 (+9), Conservatives 25 (-6), Labour 19 (-5), Liberal Democrats 8 (+3), Greens 5 (-1)
Plenty of time to go yet, let us not forget May had big leads until polling day in 2017 too.
The SNP got 46% in 2016, it only takes them and the Greens to lose a few percent and they lose their Nationalist majority under the PR system used at Holyrood
I think we both know that the day after the Holyrood election you'll be moving seamlessly to 'BJ and the Tories won a big majority in England saying no to Indy Ref II so no Indy Ref II 'cos that's what English voters voted for'.
I call bollocks. Teaming up with the PRC is not "wokery". It is, and always has been, a pursuit of profit over morality.
A lot of these big brands who have been doing their BLM stuff on social media, while over the recent past happy to do even more than just ignore issues in China e.g. the NBA sanctioned team staff, players and fans who raised the issue of Hong Kong and made them do PR saying how great China was.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Almost certainly protected I would think. Especially given it's a Grade 1 listed building.
Note that the listing specifically mentions the statue.
It's also interesting that one of the reasons for the listing is "Strong connection with the British slave trade adds to historical interest of buildings, the warehouses having been built for the express purpose of receiving goods produced by slaves on West Indian plantations."
That's so enraging. The statue was there to educate on slavery. Deliberately left in its slaving context, and acknowledged as such: like a Nazi camp still standing in Poland.
This is not Colston in Bristol. This is not "veneration of a slaver". This is a bid to educate the passer by on why those impressive docks are there, and why they were so successful, because Empire, trade, slavery. Any inquiring human could look at the statue, have a question, go into the museum, and then learn. This was Britain being honest, the opposite of celebration.
Tearing it down is the act of angry infants, who want more sugar. I despise them.
How long will it be before the names "West India Quay", "East India Dock", "Royal Victoria", "Prince Regent", "King George V", "Royal Albert" are deemed to be offensive?
Mentioned in the listing, therefore protected.
Unauthorised work (without listed building consent) to a protected building is a criminal offence,
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
True, the SNP at the time were rather keener on Mr Hitler's vision of Europe.
Do you really want us to list all the 1930s Tories sympathetic to, and in some cases supportive of, Hitler? The list is long.
There were the masses ranks of Tory appeasers, a significant chunk of Tory fascists, and the flank of white-supremacist Churchill supporters. Was there any wing of the 1930s Tory party that was not utterly repulsive?
Tbf. Churchill was reasonably sound and consistent on this issue.
Sound?
Churchill was only opposed to Hitler because he threatened his beloved British Empire. You don’t have to delve far into the archive of Churchill quotes to establish his credentials as a white suprematist.
I call bollocks. Teaming up with the PRC is not "wokery". It is, and always has been, a pursuit of profit over morality.
A lot of these big brands who have been doing their BLM stuff on social media, while over the recent past happy to do even more than just ignore issues in China e.g. the NBA sanctioned team staff, players and fans who raised the issue of Hong Kong and made them do PR saying how great China was.
Cultural war is here well and truly. This will end badly.
It will for the Union.
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
Complete and utter rubbish.
The latest polling still has Yes below 50% despite Brexit, fighting for the Union.not Wokeism is the best way to defeat Nats.
Of course there is also the delicious spectacle of Nats tearing themselves apart in a civil war over transgender rights for Unionists to enjoy
Speaking of delicious, how's the Unionist majority at Holyrood thing going?
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 53% (n/c) Conservatives 21% (-2) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 6% (+1) Greens 3% (n/c)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
SNP 48% (n/c) Conservatives 19% (-3) Labour 16% (+1) Liberal Democrats 8% (+2) Greens 7% (n/c)
Seats projection: SNP 72 (+9), Conservatives 25 (-6), Labour 19 (-5), Liberal Democrats 8 (+3), Greens 5 (-1)
Plenty of time to go yet, let us not forget May had big leads until polling day in 2017 too.
The SNP got 46% in 2016, it only takes them and the Greens to lose a few percent and they lose their Nationalist majority under the PR system used at Holyrood
Why are you so worried about the pro-Scotland majority at Holyrood? You Tories are going to block a referendum irrespective of how Scots choose to cast their ballots. Or so you keep telling us.
With Tories it is always “Heads England Wins”, “Tails Scotland Loses”.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
The Poles, Balts, East Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Albanians and Yugoslavs might quibble a little about their portion of European civilisation being saved. Still, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Wasn't exactly Churchill's fault though was it, considering the only way to stop it would have been to attack one of our allies.
"Why did the protests over George Floyd turn into mass hysteria? A new culture of groupthink is emerging, and it is causing mass psychosis. FRANK FUREDI"
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
True, the SNP at the time were rather keener on Mr Hitler's vision of Europe.
Do you really want us to list all the 1930s Tories sympathetic to, and in some cases supportive of, Hitler? The list is long.
There were the masses ranks of Tory appeasers, a significant chunk of Tory fascists, and the flank of white-supremacist Churchill supporters. Was there any wing of the 1930s Tory party that was not utterly repulsive?
Tbf. Churchill was reasonably sound and consistent on this issue.
Sound?
Churchill was only opposed to Hitler because he threatened his beloved British Empire. You don’t have to delve far into the archive of Churchill quotes to establish his credentials as a white suprematist.
No one is doing so. The fact that Adolf was entirely the wrong class and a threat to the established order in Germany and by extension the Colonial system in general, played a huge part. Nevertheless, Churchill opposed him. If only fortuitously.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Churchill was not a fascist, but he was no anti-fascist either. Many British men and women gave their lives fighting a war against a fascist regime in Spain which Churchill never had the slightest problem with. The support of most of the British right wing for the eventual war effort against Germany had zero to do with a fight against fascism or against national socialism - otherwise they would have supported the anti-fascist side in the war in Spain.
Then there was Churchill's notoriously nutcase anti-Semitic article in 1920.
Personally I can never forget that Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.
Bullshit. Churchill did more to challenge the fascists on the political stage than practically any other politician of the era. He was arguing against Hitler and fascism whilst Stalin was in the process of signing pacts and supporting the German invasion of Poland.
This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?
The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?
But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?
Almost certainly protected I would think. Especially given it's a Grade 1 listed building.
Note that the listing specifically mentions the statue.
It's also interesting that one of the reasons for the listing is "Strong connection with the British slave trade adds to historical interest of buildings, the warehouses having been built for the express purpose of receiving goods produced by slaves on West Indian plantations."
That's so enraging. The statue was there to educate on slavery. Deliberately left in its slaving context, and acknowledged as such: like a Nazi camp still standing in Poland.
This is not Colston in Bristol. This is not "veneration of a slaver". This is a bid to educate the passer by on why those impressive docks are there, and why they were so successful, because Empire, trade, slavery. Any inquiring human could look at the statue, have a question, go into the museum, and then learn. This was Britain being honest, the opposite of celebration.
Tearing it down is the act of angry infants, who want more sugar. I despise them.
This is utter drivel and I despise you for dribbling it, presumably in a drunken stupor, from your keyboard.
The West India docks were built on the back of the slave trade and Milligan plundered his loot from Jamaica by owning 526 slaves.
I suggest you go away and watch Michael Portillo's brilliant programme on Jamaica in his Empire Journeys series, then return when you have learned a little history.
And the 'sugar' comment is beyond contempt in the context.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Churchill was not a fascist, but he was no anti-fascist either. Many British men and women gave their lives fighting a war against a fascist regime in Spain which Churchill never had the slightest problem with. The support of most of the British right wing for the eventual war effort against Germany had zero to do with a fight against fascism or against national socialism - otherwise they would have supported the anti-fascist side in the war in Spain.
Then there was Churchill's notoriously nutcase anti-Semitic article in 1920.
Personally I can never forget that Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.
Bullshit. Churchill did more to challenge the fascists on the political stage than practically any other politician of the era. He was arguing against Hitler and fascism whilst Stalin was in the process of signing pacts and supporting the German invasion of Poland.
Churchill: better than Stalin
I'm a big fan of Churchill in the context of WWII. His lone voice in the wilderness years was remarkable and portentous. I have been to Chartwell many times and shed several tears.
But, and it's a big but, I am not going to put Churchill in the realm of sainthood. He was evidently a very difficult person: an aristocratic imperialist with delusions of British empire, a misogynist and almost certainly something of a racist.
He was the right man to lead Britain in WWII and nothing more, although those handful of years are enough to let us forgive the decades when he was manifestly wrong about almost everything else.
Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
The Poles, Balts, East Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Albanians and Yugoslavs might quibble a little about their portion of European civilisation being saved. Still, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Wasn't exactly Churchill's fault though was it, considering the only way to stop it would have been to attack one of our allies.
Churchill chose to ally himself with Stalin.
The Poles, Balts etc mentioned above didn´t do all that much to save themselves (though some individuals got away and joined in the war on our side) - and some of their governments even took them in on the Nazi side.
So Churchill didn´t have much choice when looking for allies. At one stage there were none available at all, until Hitler himself brought the USSR and the USA in on the same side as ourselves.
For those who remember the 1980s, you’ll probably recall this story. The assassination of a West European head of government was a big thing back then, and still would be today; although within the context of the Cold War everyone’s antennae were very attuned to destabilising political events. That is less true now when destabilising political events are commonplace.
Anyway, a heads-up: the police say they have solved the murder and the press conference is this morning at 08:30 London time.
If you can cope with Swedish use the SVT Play app or website because being sent live on SVT1. It’s such a big international story I suspect they’ll have instant English subtitles available.
The media have definitely pivoted. I guess they've decided that the economy is the big story (clue: it always was) and are going for the government over social distancing.
What they haven't thought about is that even if social distancing is ended, people won't be going back to normal voluntarily.
A lot of developing countries are still in their first one too.
I suspect that we will just have a single one, but with a long fat, bumpy tail. I dont think that it will spread again here like Feb and early March. People are taking at least some social distancing measures seriously.
A common theme seems to be that while testing capacity is adequate, there is a severe lack of contact tracing, and so infected individuals are not being isolated/quarantined.
A common theme seems to be that while testing capacity is adequate, there is a severe lack of contact tracing, and so infected individuals are not being isolated/quarantined.
A common theme seems to be that while testing capacity is adequate, there is a severe lack of contact tracing, and so infected individuals are not being isolated/quarantined.
Test and Trace not world beating?
What a surprise.
Government are clinging to phrases like that as Snow White's stepmother clung to her mirror...... mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?
14 day self-isolation for those returning from their skiing trips would have stopped Covid in its tracks - but was just too horrible to contemplate, though, wasn't it? I mean, imagine the letters pages in The Guardian....
A lot of developing countries are still in their first one too.
I suspect that we will just have a single one, but with a long fat, bumpy tail. I dont think that it will spread again here like Feb and early March. People are taking at least some social distancing measures seriously.
Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
The Poles, Balts, East Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Rumanians, Albanians and Yugoslavs might quibble a little about their portion of European civilisation being saved. Still, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
Wasn't exactly Churchill's fault though was it, considering the only way to stop it would have been to attack one of our allies.
I'm sure Churchill was quite capable of stabbing an ally in the back. The practicality of it, however, was another matter.
I've ordered a DVD box set of Little Britain. And I don't even *like* Little Britain. I thought it was crude and childish with schoolboy like humour. But there were some great sketches - Vicky Pollard and "computer says no" that brilliantly satirised modern Britain. And I don't like censorship.
Bought.
Bo Selecta' is another. I never found "Keith Lemon" funny (nor the bear) but many of his other characters made me chuckle. He was wearing stupid masks to do silly caricatures and send up the pretences of a number of celebrities in the noughties, often with strong northern accents, including Ozzy Osbourne, Michael Jackson, Elton John, Gareth Gates, David Blaine and Craig David. The last one I find particularly interesting as Leigh Francis has said for years that he's not responsible for his career or his music as David has always blamed him for issues he's had there.
Yes, some might have been offended by some of its portrayals - including the targets - but you have no right not to be offended. These were all pretty woke comedians. John Barnes tweeted that he thought censoring it was crazy: he got called an Uncle Tom for his trouble.
I do wonder what's next. The Catherine Tate Show had some choice scenes, as did the In Betweeners, and there will be others.
I'm certainly not going to rely on Netflix or Amazon going forwards for shows or programmes and will buy DVD hard copies wherever I can now.
Comments
Note that the listing specifically mentions the statue.
It's also interesting that one of the reasons for the listing is "Strong connection with the British slave trade adds to historical interest of buildings, the warehouses having been built for the express purpose of receiving goods produced by slaves on West Indian plantations."
Then there was Churchill's notoriously nutcase anti-Semitic article in 1920.
Personally I can never forget that Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.
The statue of slave owner Robert Milligan at West India Quay in London’s Docklands was removed using a JCB, after the charity which owns the land where it stood promised to organise its “safe removal” following a petition launched by Ehtasham Haque.
The local council, Tower Hamlets, said it had removed the statue and had “also announced a review into monuments and other sites in our borough to understand how we should represent the more troubling periods in our history”.
.. which seems to be rather incoherent, but doesn't say that Khan ordered the deplinthing,
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/09/sadiq-khan-orders-review-of-all-london-statues-for-slavery-links
https://twitter.com/BRRN_Fed/status/1270345660617891842?s=19
Not many others though. Who watches Bread or the Liver Birds now?
Two Pints.
Oh wait...
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1270411061376815108
Meanwhile, is Trump exempt from civil suit for what he does while in office that might otherwise be tortious? He is careful to use the words "appearing" and "could be" in his Buffalo tweet, but he also writes "(H)e fell harder than was pushed" and "Was aiming scanner" which appear to amount to direct accusations of dishonesty and criminality against Mr Gugino.
Last orders please!
Perhaps old soldiers, old colonials and politicians is always a bad idea for a statue. I love that in order to remember the witch trials in Salem they have a statue of Elizabeth Montgomery (Samantha from Bewitched).
BlackAdder 2 has aged pretty well
Better Together’s campaign in 2014 was transactional: arguing that folk were financially better off in the Union, creating Sterling worries, terrifying old ladies about their pension etc. That nonsense won, narrowly, with the help of the BBC, the European Commission, Obama and all the pals David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband could muster.
If BetterTogether2 try to move from that transactional script to a culture war script, they will get thrashed. Wise voices will try to counsel that they stick to transactional arguments, but Brexit, Johnson, Farage, Cummings etc have so infected London with cultural poison that they won’t be able to stop themselves.
All who want to retain the Union would be well advised to oppose the raging culture war.
She was wonderful and I loved that programme. Thank you for telling me that.
Goodnight all (Y)
The latest polling still has Yes below 50% despite Brexit, fighting for the Union.not Wokeism is the best way to defeat Nats.
Of course there is also the delicious spectacle of Nats tearing themselves apart in a civil war over transgender rights for Unionists to enjoy
It is, and always has been, a pursuit of profit over morality.
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 53% (n/c)
Conservatives 21% (-2)
Labour 16% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 6% (+1)
Greens 3% (n/c)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
SNP 48% (n/c)
Conservatives 19% (-3)
Labour 16% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 8% (+2)
Greens 7% (n/c)
Seats projection: SNP 72 (+9), Conservatives 25 (-6), Labour 19 (-5), Liberal Democrats 8 (+3), Greens 5 (-1)
There were the masses ranks of Tory appeasers, a significant chunk of Tory fascists, and the flank of white-supremacist Churchill supporters. Was there any wing of the 1930s Tory party that was not utterly repulsive?
My answer to "If there's a second wave, would you blame the government or the public?" would be "Neither". It's not as if there wasn't some level of preparedness against an epidemic already, and yet the virus got through. Viruses are pesky blighters. I wouldn't blame either the government or the "public" for this virus coming back for a second lethal attack as in 1918, possibly significantly mutated and with higher mortality in some demographics.
Sure, the government and the "public" might play a part, but I probably won't have the information to form much of an opinion on that.
If the pollster did use only the stated order, perhaps "Neither" would have beaten 4% had it been listed first?
The SNP got 46% in 2016, it only takes them and the Greens to lose a few percent and they lose their Nationalist majority under the PR system used at Holyrood
Massive double standards...
https://www.businessinsider.nl/nba-china-feud-timeline-daryl-morey-tweet-hong-kong-protests-2019-10?international=true&r=US
The South Park episode on this is one of their best ever.
Unauthorised work (without listed building consent) to a protected building is a criminal offence,
Churchill was only opposed to Hitler because he threatened his beloved British Empire. You don’t have to delve far into the archive of Churchill quotes to establish his credentials as a white suprematist.
With Tories it is always “Heads England Wins”, “Tails Scotland Loses”.
A new culture of groupthink is emerging, and it is causing mass psychosis.
FRANK FUREDI"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/06/09/why-did-the-protests-over-george-floyd-turn-into-mass-hysteria/
Nevertheless, Churchill opposed him. If only fortuitously.
The West India docks were built on the back of the slave trade and Milligan plundered his loot from Jamaica by owning 526 slaves.
I suggest you go away and watch Michael Portillo's brilliant programme on Jamaica in his Empire Journeys series, then return when you have learned a little history.
And the 'sugar' comment is beyond contempt in the context.
But, and it's a big but, I am not going to put Churchill in the realm of sainthood. He was evidently a very difficult person: an aristocratic imperialist with delusions of British empire, a misogynist and almost certainly something of a racist.
He was the right man to lead Britain in WWII and nothing more, although those handful of years are enough to let us forgive the decades when he was manifestly wrong about almost everything else.
So Churchill didn´t have much choice when looking for allies. At one stage there were none available at all, until Hitler himself brought the USSR and the USA in on the same side as ourselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Olof_Palme
Anyway, a heads-up: the police say they have solved the murder and the press conference is this morning at 08:30 London time.
If you can cope with Swedish use the SVT Play app or website because being sent live on SVT1. It’s such a big international story I suspect they’ll have instant English subtitles available.
What they haven't thought about is that even if social distancing is ended, people won't be going back to normal voluntarily.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryancbrooks/crossfit-ceo-founder-zoom-greg-glassman-george-floyd
https://twitter.com/cubfan13241/status/1270507308016185344?s=21
https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1270558453157761030
A lot of developing countries are still in their first one too.
I suspect that we will just have a single one, but with a long fat, bumpy tail. I dont think that it will spread again here like Feb and early March. People are taking at least some social distancing measures seriously.
https://twitter.com/EvolveDotZoo/status/1270391992921579523
https://twitter.com/EvolveDotZoo/status/1270392620066508808
What a surprise.
I see Gone With the Wind has been condemned for the unforgivable crime of not being in tune with 2020 political fanatical bullshit:
https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1270542141559910401
In the eyes of spike everything is a culture war.
Bought.
Bo Selecta' is another. I never found "Keith Lemon" funny (nor the bear) but many of his other characters made me chuckle. He was wearing stupid masks to do silly caricatures and send up the pretences of a number of celebrities in the noughties, often with strong northern accents, including Ozzy Osbourne, Michael Jackson, Elton John, Gareth Gates, David Blaine and Craig David. The last one I find particularly interesting as Leigh Francis has said for years that he's not responsible for his career or his music as David has always blamed him for issues he's had there.
Yes, some might have been offended by some of its portrayals - including the targets - but you have no right not to be offended. These were all pretty woke comedians. John Barnes tweeted that he thought censoring it was crazy: he got called an Uncle Tom for his trouble.
I do wonder what's next. The Catherine Tate Show had some choice scenes, as did the In Betweeners, and there will be others.
I'm certainly not going to rely on Netflix or Amazon going forwards for shows or programmes and will buy DVD hard copies wherever I can now.