The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
I am pretty certain there will be no extension but also no "WTO" Brexit.
I expect an "interim deal" by the year-end which keeps things closely aligned into 2021, with suitable wording about "selective divergence" being on the table for future negotiation.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
I'm naively assuming that the main reason for not extending now is to avoid any liability for the EU coronavirus recovery fund.
If we are not liable for it now, why would continuing the status quo make any difference?
Our liabilities for this year are pre-agreed. Our liabilities if we extend are not and are subject to negotiations and agreed to be related to the EU (which the pandemic costs are going into).
If we extend then we'll be liable for a share in the EU budget next year, and if the EU chooses to demand that we pay a share in the pandemic costs we would be over a barrel and unable to say no without refusing the extension.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
I am pretty certain that there will be no extension but also no "WTO" Brexit.
I expect an "interim deal" by the year-end which keeps things closely aligned into 2021, with suitable wording about "selective divergence" being on the table for future negotiation.
An extension without an extension in other words.
In other words that would be a deal.
If it involves no money, no free movement, the ability to diverge while keeping trade free then that would be an incredible deal don't you think? Better than membership surely?
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
In developments that won't shock anybody at all, it turns out the government is more worried about the threat from a revived brexit party than it is from what is left of remain.
Not too sure the Brexit party is about to make a comeback, we're out the EU now. What we do now is just detail to the average punter I expect.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon.
It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves.
Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
But it’s not the government, any government, doing it. Even in the US First Amendment protection does not extend to what companies choose to make available or publish on their platforms. It’s not censorship. These shows remain available. You want to watch Gone With the Wind today? Rent it off Apple TV or Amazon Prime for less than 4 quid. Want to watch Little Britain this evening? Still available to rent or buy on Google Play. Fawlty Towers? All episodes still available on Amazon Prime. This whole culture war blacklash from the right is utterly an utterly pathetic diversion.
The Boris fans would rather talk about the weather than discuss the government's handling of the pandemic. Get them onto their "political correctness gone mad" comfort zone and they will bang on for days.
When the dust settles there won't be a film or a TV series you won't still be able to see that you could have seen before and half a dozen statues of slave traders will have been moved into museums.
That won't stop them whipping themselves up into a frenzy about what might happen even though the suggestions get ever more ludicrous and will never happen. Some spotty oik threatens to pull down a statue nobody has ever heard of and they are all clutching their pearls. It's what they love and, as I said, so much easier than trying to defend their government's pandemic performance.
See also the outrage and shock at a few sensible precautions being taken to protect some monuments, as though the end of civilisation were upon us.
(Though I think Carlotta's apparent scheme to wrap the Bruce in tin foil a bit farfetched.)
The price of a Trump win has drifted to 2.45. His unity speech is now planned for 19 June, "Juneteenth", in Tulsa, Oklahoma. How the Democrats must have punched the air with joy when they heard that. Seriously, how can it go right? The greatest unity candidate the world has ever seen has already hugged and kissed the Union flag, so if he doesn't want to be biased he's got one more to go:
An even bigger concern is what happens between November and January, should he not win. That will be the moment of maximum danger.
Not so - it is what he will incite on the day of the vote in order to win the vote Mugabe-style that is the maximum danger.
If he wins the vote on the day, and retains the support of his VP and GOP Senators, then there is no constitutional means to remove him from office. He would have the Supreme Court, Attorney General and military on his side as the victor of the election.
If he loses the vote then he's done. The military won't stand behind him. The Supreme Court won't overturn the election. He has to win - which means unleashing violence to stop Democrats voting.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
Sturgeon and Drakesford write joint letter to Boris demanding an extension to transistion
Sturgeon is consistent but Drakesford ignoring Wales vote to leave is brave
All four countries of the UK have left the EU. An extension to transition is not delaying Brexit.
The purpose is to stoke up a bit of "we've been disrespected" grievance which is always a good one for SNP. A bit surprised Welsh Labour are going with it given the experience of Scottish Labour when that theme got into the political bloodstream north of the border.
Hopefully never. That's the role of Councils not Central Government.
On the contrary [edit: in part, sorry]. Natural England, English Heritage, and so on.
I thought they were ran independently and not by Central Government?
What's been done so far that has anything to do with them anyway? The statues that have been debated so far are local government matters not central government matters.
Historic England - to use the up to date term, my slip, sorry - has a major role to play in listing buildings and structures:
And it's a central government agency - a quango as I suppose it used to be called. Debatable whether you call it a central gmt body but this does mean the matters it deals with are central government in a sense.
In listed buildings yes, not in statues that are regularly moved anyway.
As far as I know nobody has suggested pulling down buildings, despite the straw man that people are using about it.
Well, IIRC fixings and fittings of buildings are part of them, so eg the Rhodes statue at Oxford would come under that.
And listing is not just buildings but structures, gardens, etc. as well. And statues in isolation are listed - abundantly:
Indeed but none of the statues that have come down [so far] are listed are they? Which makes them a local government matter.
Both the statues in Bristol and West India Quay were listed.
I thought we'd done that one to death already.
The one in West India Quay had been moved repeatedly already so when was it listed from?
I think that's a non-question.
It is (or was, until Tower Hamlets moved it) in its original position, and it is in the listing, and the law says that items included in a listing are listed.
Clearly, since it is in the listing it was either in it since the list item was created, or the item has been edited 1997 (ish?) when the statue was returned.
In either case it is included.
Do you have a link to the listing? I thought it was said that the building was listed and some erroneously though that included the statue automatically which it doesn't.
Quote of whole of sub-section 5 (you being a detail man), I don't see too much doubt here, but others may differ. IIRC there is some case law around the meaning of "fixed to" and "part of the land". If something is temporarily removed in 1943 (presumably for protection from the Germans !) and restored to to the same position some time later, is that still "part of the land"? --------------------------
(5)In this Act “listed building” means a building which is for the time being included in a list compiled or approved by the Secretary of State under this section; and for the purposes of this Act—
(a) any object or structure fixed to the building;
(b) any object or structure within the curtilage of the building which, although not fixed to the building, forms part of the land and has done so since before lst July 1948,shall [F4, subject to subsection (5A)(a),] be treated as part of the building.
[F5(5A)In a list compiled or approved under this section, an entry for a building situated in England may provide—
(a) that an object or structure mentioned in subsection (5)(a) or (b) is not to be treated as part of the building for the purposes of this Act;
(b) that any part or feature of the building is not of special architectural or historic interest.]
(6) Schedule 1 shall have effect for the purpose of making provision as to the treatment as listed buildings of certain buildings formerly subject to building preservation orders. -------------
It's tempting to report the offence to the authorities, just to get some more clarity.
Under 5b the statue wouldn't be covered since it's not been there continually since 1948. However it appears the listing was amended in 2007 and does specifically refer to the statue. That's news to me, people were previously saying that simply the building being listed was sufficient (it isn't)
I think it is arguable under both 5a and 5b. 5a does not specify "attached to the building before the list entry was created."
And I am not clear that a period in storage stops it being part of the site by interrupting continuity.
Also, there is an explicit provision for *exclusion* of items, which arguably creates a default that they are included.
London is full of things that were put in storage in the war and were returned after the listing system was created, though it would take some work to find an exact parallel of something returned after the *entry* was created.
Years of happy debating for Architectural Lawyers.
Meanwhile, someone definitely moved it *without public consultation* .
There is a quite reasonable justification of necessity, though. And the reality is that if the local authority leadership decides to something along these lines, there is no effective legal recourse. Particularly if they say they've put it into storage for its own protection.
FWIW, I think that approach quite sensible. The issue will get debated at great and tedious length (as it has been on here), passions will cool on both sides, eventually, and a reasonable accommodation will be arrived at.... eventually.
The chance of talks intenifying had the UK extended: 0%
Precisely why an extension would be an awful idea.
I quite agree. The UK has already folded its position and shown that the EU (indeed the entire world), will get prefernetial access to UK markets from 1 January 2021:
The Tariff schedule the UK arranged an intern to produce has gone in the bin and it has now taken the sovereign decision to be a rule-taker of tarrifs when exporting its goods and won't be charging any on incoming goods.
I expect the EU to time out the talks to ensure that this is the arrangment going forwards.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
In developments that won't shock anybody at all, it turns out the government is more worried about the threat from a revived brexit party than it is from what is left of remain.
Not too sure the Brexit party is about to make a comeback, we're out the EU now. What we do now is just detail to the average punter I expect.
I see that the Welsh Assemby poll yesterday had the BXP on 8%.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
In developments that won't shock anybody at all, it turns out the government is more worried about the threat from a revived brexit party than it is from what is left of remain.
Not too sure the Brexit party is about to make a comeback, we're out the EU now. What we do now is just detail to the average punter I expect.
Maybe
I can't think of another reason Johnson isn't going for an extension.
People are going to have to get used to the idea of switching between 2m and 1m, perhaps more than once, I think. Quite obviously government will try to ease restriction as soon as they can - but might well have to re-impose them, if case numbers head upwards again at a later date. Anything but another lockdown.
In the past few weeks, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has distributed grants from the £50m Reopening High Streets Safely Fund to councils across England, to be used on signage and barriers on streets and in shops.
Tudor Evans, the Labour leader of Plymouth council, which has received £235,000 from the fund, said it had been used for large numbers of discs on street surfaces indicating 2-metre distances, and to help hundreds of shops prepare. These measures would need to be redone if the distance was reduced.
“If it changes in the next few weeks it will make people angry,” Evans said. “A lot of people have sent a lot of time in the public sector, and in the private sector, to get things ready for opening up in accordance with government regulations. To have this uncertainty, this close to opening, is really an emblem for how chaotic the government’s handling has been.”
Andrew Goodacre, the chief executive of the British Independent Retailers Association, which represents smaller shops, said any reduction would receive a mixed reception from members...
Am I the only one who thinks that a social distance of 1m from two is sensible because it doesn’t need extensive remarking. Just put it halfway between the other markers
Unless it turns out that his illness has caused him to be permanently disabled, Boris isn't going anywhere, despite the wishful thinking of his opponents. Yes, Covid and its after-effects are going to make the next couple of years a nightmare across the Western world, but that’s unavoidable whoever the leader is, and there’s plenty of opportunity to get back to a semblance of good times by 2024.
As for ephemeral polls, the current orgy of cultural vandalism has interrupted Labour’s rise as the public wakes up to what the fuck they may be voting into power, as yesterday’s Survation suggests...
One solitary statue of a mass murderer gets unlawfully taken down, the rightists of PB call it an “orgy of cultural vandalism” and imply the Labour Party is to blame. In the meantime, we will have around 60,000 excess deaths as a result of the Government’s muddled response, more than any comparable country on an aggregate or per capita basis, and the worst economic downturn in the industrialised world, but that’s “unavoidable whoever the leader is”. In the words of one commentator here “you couldn’t make it up”.
One solitary statue taken down by a violent mob explicitly celebrated by Labour MP Nadia Whittome:
Note her exact words about a future Labour Government:
'I celebrate these acts of resistance.'
'We need a movement that will tear down systemic racism and the slave owner statues that symbolise it. And we need to win a government that will always be on the side of this movement.'
The statue's vandals have published a hit list of dozens more across the country to destroy, and they've already defaced many more, including Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.
Meanwhile, Labour mayors and councils across the country are jumping at the opportunity to 'review' their local monuments, and in the case of Sadiq Khan, to just send in the JCBs as he did with Milligan.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves about the left's intentions.
And I’m afraid the numbers speak for themselves as to the number of people your party has negligently allowed to die these last three months. Are you on the side of living humans or statues? The impression you give is that you give more of a damn about chunks of metal celebrating mass murderers like Coulson and Milligan than the people of this country. But I am sure that is not the case.
I'm sure the eventual public inquiry will establish exactly what occurred in this unprecendented global pandemic and the extent to which deaths could or could not have been avoided. Of course, you have all the answers now, thanks to your handy time machine.
'Living humans or statues' isn't a mutually-exclusive choice, by the way. One can want to save as many lives as possible from the pandemic, as the Government is doing, while deploring the violence and cultural vandalism of the far left. People have noticed what they're about, and it doesn't look as though they like it...
You base your entire paranoid polemic on one tweet from one Labour MP and a single Survation Poll that still shows your party’s support far more than halved in a month. As for “time machine” - you forget I borrowed yours, you know the one you use to predict elections? In the meantime the below tweets represent the actual views of the Labour Party - and most people in this country
David Lammy has - to my amazement - won my respect on this occasion. He explicitly said that he doesn't condone violence and riots AND that he would not march with BLM because that would make him a hypocrite after criticizing Cummings.
As for Starmer, on the other hand, actions speak louder than words. Two days after the illegal actions of that mob, he and dozens of Labour MPs put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the protesters.
If they didn't mean to lend their implicit support to illegal acts of violence then literally kneeling before a movement that had perpetrated them very publicly a couple of days earlier was a funny way of showing it...
They were kneeling in support of a movement protesting the racist torture murder of a black civilian by the police of our closest ally. That is what the protests are about, not some imagined “cultural vandalism”, which is a straw man minor by product emphasised by people such as yourself to divert attention from the real issues that need highlighting. But of course you place an equivalence on preserving the memory of the dead enslavers of Black people rather than the actual lives of their living descendants.
There is literally no comparison between the US and UK on this score, so importing the context of their racial conflicts to this country makes absolutely no sense. Here are the figures to prove it:
Since 1870, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.
In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. That's 5x as many deaths caused by police in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK!
Funny how the USA is suddenly our 'closest ally' for lefties when they want to import their cultural conflicts, but they want absolutely nothing to do with them at any other time...
So protesting what happens in other countries is not permissible? Black people should only care about what happens here? As for the UK, you are more than selective.
Azelle Rodney and Jean Charles de Menezes were killed because of how they looked, the colour of their skin, the latter because he fitted the profile of a "terrorist" in the minds of our boys in blue, simply because he was a little darker in complexion than they liked.
A massively disproportionate number of people of colour also die in police custody here - between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police) were reported, 69 were from BME communities – 18%. In comparison with white people, black people are six times more likely to be stopped and searched while Asian people are twice as likely to be.
"Taking the knee" is an alternative to violent protest. The fact that Colin Kaepernick tried it and lost his career means that some people have gone further because, clearly, it didn't work. The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage.
You can peacefully protest what happens on Mars for all I care. It's when the protesters turn violent, assault the police, and commit criminal damage that it becomes illicit - as is now clearly the case.
'between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police were reported), 69 were from BME communities – 18%'
Otherwise known as fewer than 3 individuals per year in the latter group. There should be obviously be as few deaths in police custody as possible, but those figures are no reason for nationwide unrest.
'The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage'
That's some heroic spin indeed. Tell me, if a mob of Brexiteers had destroyed an EU monument - and put out a list of dozens more targets they intended to destroy - and then Boris and dozens of Conservative MPs had put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the Brexiteers, would your interpretation be as generous?
Somehow I think not.
Again, you defame a protest movement by straw man accusations of something they have not done. Tell me - on what basis do you say that Black Lives Matter have done any of those things?
'Baden-Powell is among those added to a growing “hit list” of nearly 80 statues across the UK, as anti-racism action grew following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on 25 May.'
Point me to where it says that BLM sanctioned it?
Point me to where they have explicitly said that they do not intend to destroy more monuments.
Or are you going to pretend that there is a magic curtain separating all the protesters and activists who want exactly that from BLM itself?
The Black Lives Matter movement have never called for the destruction of monuments -BLM agree with Tory business minister Nadhim Zahawi that statutes of slavers should be removed but not torn down. I have shown you a tweet from them where they deny such a thing and I can find nothing that suggests that they have ever done so.
As for your fatuous suggestion of a "magic curtain" I would never (as you invited me to do) equate the thugs of Britain First with the Eurosceptic Wing of the Tory party despite their sharing some of the same desires.
Indeed there has hardly been any "destruction" and the small amount that there has, notably the statue of Edward Coulson (which will be cleaned up and put in a museum) is counterproductive to the movement, as they accept. The East India Docks Statute was carefully removed by the GLA and Corporation of London. The constant harping on about the Bristol incident, and the attempts to tar the whole of BLM with the brush of the Stop Trump website map, which is not affiliated, is an attempt by the right to divide and conquer. There is no BLM "hit list" - it's made up.
BLM have cancelled their central London protest for the weekend because they fear violence. That is the mark of a responsible organisation. Any damage to monuments that takes place then will not be as a result of that organisation - anymore than violence committed by people who happen to support Brexit wass the responsibility of responsible Brexit supporting organisations.
How incredibly convenient - they get to sit back and pretend they have nothing to do with violence, having revved their supporters up to such a pitch that violence and vandalism are all but inevitable.
I suspect the organisers of BLM just realized their potential liability to a whole host of criminal charges and shat themselves.
'What, us? Statues? Never heard of them! Nothing to do with us, honest!'
It was cancelled as a result of right wing threats of violence. While I am sure you are happy to dismiss incidents of violence by those on the right, and those of the police, as "a few bad apples" you have clearly decided that BLM must of course be responsible for everyone who attends a protest. In doing so you are simply displaying your own prejudices.
If this were, say, a Brexiteer protest being cancelled because of threatened violence you would be blaming the "lefties" stifling their "free speech". When it comes to a left wing protest being cancelled because your fellow travellers have threatened to come and knock some heads together, its the fault of the party cancelling. Free speech is only for the right.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
Divide and conquer, it's the route to power. The marxists behind BLM know it well. The pawns are attacking each other
But who are the puppet masters pulling the strings of the DFLA* and what political philosophy do they espouse?
* The acronym confers a little more gravitas, I feel, so I'm awarding them it for balance viz a vis BLM. "The DFLA" smacks of living rough in the forests of England, tooled up and waiting for the call. Serious business.
I'd say they were more reactionaries than political philosophers. A fair dose of racism thrown in too
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
The chance of talks intenifying had the UK extended: 0%
Precisely why an extension would be an awful idea.
I quite agree. The UK has already folded its position and shown that the EU (indeed the entire world), will get prefernetial access to UK markets from 1 January 2021:
The Tariff schedule the UK arranged an intern to produce has gone in the bin and it has now taken the sovereign decision to be a rule-taker of tarrifs when exporting its goods and won't be charging any on incoming goods.
I expect the EU to time out the talks to ensure that this is the arrangment going forwards.
Having no import tarrifs is an interesting decision. Good for consumers perhaps, but not much negotiating leverage.
Why would the German carmakers and Italian prosecco growers ride to our rescue if they had no tarrifs already?
Hopefully the perpetrators are found and given the same punishment as the ones who brought down the other statue.
It's shocking the number of people who are outing themselves as blatant racists.
I guess like most people who aren't somehow white supremacists, if I was in charge of punishing people I would certainly give a more severe punishment to people throwing bleach on a statue of a black poet, than to people pulling down the statue of a slave trader.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
I'm naively assuming that the main reason for not extending now is to avoid any liability for the EU coronavirus recovery fund.
If we are not liable for it now, why would continuing the status quo make any difference?
Because it'll be in the new budget cycle.
I am sure there is a deal to be done on the basis of a negotiated fixed payment that continues our existing terms and doesn’t expose the UK to further unspecified liabilities. You sit in Dubai and continue to froth about the EU if you must, but in the real world an extension is clearly in our country’s interest.
Unless it turns out that his illness has caused him to be permanently disabled, Boris isn't going anywhere, despite the wishful thinking of his opponents. Yes, Covid and its after-effects are going to make the next couple of years a nightmare across the Western world, but that’s unavoidable whoever the leader is, and there’s plenty of opportunity to get back to a semblance of good times by 2024.
As for ephemeral polls, the current orgy of cultural vandalism has interrupted Labour’s rise as the public wakes up to what the fuck they may be voting into power, as yesterday’s Survation suggests...
One solitary statue of a mass murderer gets unlawfully taken down, the rightists of PB call it an “orgy of cultural vandalism” and imply the Labour Party is to blame. In the meantime, we will have around 60,000 excess deaths as a result of the Government’s muddled response, more than any comparable country on an aggregate or per capita basis, and the worst economic downturn in the industrialised world, but that’s “unavoidable whoever the leader is”. In the words of one commentator here “you couldn’t make it up”.
One solitary statue taken down by a violent mob explicitly celebrated by Labour MP Nadia Whittome:
Note her exact words about a future Labour Government:
'I celebrate these acts of resistance.'
'We need a movement that will tear down systemic racism and the slave owner statues that symbolise it. And we need to win a government that will always be on the side of this movement.'
The statue's vandals have published a hit list of dozens more across the country to destroy, and they've already defaced many more, including Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.
Meanwhile, Labour mayors and councils across the country are jumping at the opportunity to 'review' their local monuments, and in the case of Sadiq Khan, to just send in the JCBs as he did with Milligan.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves about the left's intentions.
And I’m afraid the numbers speak for themselves as to the number of people your party has negligently allowed to die these last three months. Are you on the side of living humans or statues? The impression you give is that you give more of a damn about chunks of metal celebrating mass murderers like Coulson and Milligan than the people of this country. But I am sure that is not the case.
I'm sure the eventual public inquiry will establish exactly what occurred in this unprecendented global pandemic and the extent to which deaths could or could not have been avoided. Of course, you have all the answers now, thanks to your handy time machine.
'Living humans or statues' isn't a mutually-exclusive choice, by the way. One can want to save as many lives as possible from the pandemic, as the Government is doing, while deploring the violence and cultural vandalism of the far left. People have noticed what they're about, and it doesn't look as though they like it...
You base your entire paranoid polemic on one tweet from one Labour MP and a single Survation Poll that still shows your party’s support far more than halved in a month. As for “time machine” - you forget I borrowed yours, you know the one you use to predict elections? In the meantime the below tweets represent the actual views of the Labour Party - and most people in this country
David Lammy has - to my amazement - won my respect on this occasion. He explicitly said that he doesn't condone violence and riots AND that he would not march with BLM because that would make him a hypocrite after criticizing Cummings.
As for Starmer, on the other hand, actions speak louder than words. Two days after the illegal actions of that mob, he and dozens of Labour MPs put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the protesters.
If they didn't mean to lend their implicit support to illegal acts of violence then literally kneeling before a movement that had perpetrated them very publicly a couple of days earlier was a funny way of showing it...
They were kneeling in support of a movement protesting the racist torture murder of a black civilian by the police of our closest ally. That is what the protests are about, not some imagined “cultural vandalism”, which is a straw man minor by product emphasised by people such as yourself to divert attention from the real issues that need highlighting. But of course you place an equivalence on preserving the memory of the dead enslavers of Black people rather than the actual lives of their living descendants.
There is literally no comparison between the US and UK on this score, so importing the context of their racial conflicts to this country makes absolutely no sense. Here are the figures to prove it:
Since 1870, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.
In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. That's 5x as many deaths caused by police in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK!
Funny how the USA is suddenly our 'closest ally' for lefties when they want to import their cultural conflicts, but they want absolutely nothing to do with them at any other time...
So protesting what happens in other countries is not permissible? Black people should only care about what happens here? As for the UK, you are more than selective.
Azelle Rodney and Jean Charles de Menezes were killed because of how they looked, the colour of their skin, the latter because he fitted the profile of a "terrorist" in the minds of our boys in blue, simply because he was a little darker in complexion than they liked.
A massively disproportionate number of people of colour also die in police custody here - between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police) were reported, 69 were from BME communities – 18%. In comparison with white people, black people are six times more likely to be stopped and searched while Asian people are twice as likely to be.
"Taking the knee" is an alternative to violent protest. The fact that Colin Kaepernick tried it and lost his career means that some people have gone further because, clearly, it didn't work. The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage.
You can peacefully protest what happens on Mars for all I care. It's when the protesters turn violent, assault the police, and commit criminal damage that it becomes illicit - as is now clearly the case.
'between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police were reported), 69 were from BME communities – 18%'
Otherwise known as fewer than 3 individuals per year in the latter group. There should be obviously be as few deaths in police custody as possible, but those figures are no reason for nationwide unrest.
'The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage'
That's some heroic spin indeed. Tell me, if a mob of Brexiteers had destroyed an EU monument - and put out a list of dozens more targets they intended to destroy - and then Boris and dozens of Conservative MPs had put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the Brexiteers, would your interpretation be as generous?
Somehow I think not.
Again, you defame a protest movement by straw man accusations of something they have not done. Tell me - on what basis do you say that Black Lives Matter have done any of those things?
'Baden-Powell is among those added to a growing “hit list” of nearly 80 statues across the UK, as anti-racism action grew following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on 25 May.'
Point me to where it says that BLM sanctioned it?
Point me to where they have explicitly said that they do not intend to destroy more monuments.
Or are you going to pretend that there is a magic curtain separating all the protesters and activists who want exactly that from BLM itself?
The Black Lives Matter movement have never called for the destruction of monuments -BLM agree with Tory business minister Nadhim Zahawi that statutes of slavers should be removed but not torn down. I have shown you a tweet from them where they deny such a thing and I can find nothing that suggests that they have ever done so.
As for your fatuous suggestion of a "magic curtain" I would never (as you invited me to do) equate the thugs of Britain First with the Eurosceptic Wing of the Tory party despite their sharing some of the same desires.
Indeed there has hardly been any "destruction" and the small amount that there has, notably the statue of Edward Coulson (which will be cleaned up and put in a museum) is counterproductive to the movement, as they accept. The East India Docks Statute was carefully removed by the GLA and Corporation of London. The constant harping on about the Bristol incident, and the attempts to tar the whole of BLM with the brush of the Stop Trump website map, which is not affiliated, is an attempt by the right to divide and conquer. There is no BLM "hit list" - it's made up.
BLM have cancelled their central London protest for the weekend because they fear violence. That is the mark of a responsible organisation. Any damage to monuments that takes place then will not be as a result of that organisation - anymore than violence committed by people who happen to support Brexit wass the responsibility of responsible Brexit supporting organisations.
How incredibly convenient - they get to sit back and pretend they have nothing to do with violence, having revved their supporters up to such a pitch that violence and vandalism are all but inevitable.
I suspect the organisers of BLM just realized their potential liability to a whole host of criminal charges and shat themselves.
'What, us? Statues? Never heard of them! Nothing to do with us, honest!'
It was cancelled as a result of right wing threats of violence. While I am sure you are happy to dismiss incidents of violence by those on the right, and those of the police, as "a few bad apples" you have clearly decided that BLM must of course be responsible for everyone who attends a protest. In doing so you are simply displaying your own prejudices.
If this were, say, a Brexiteer protest being cancelled because of threatened violence you would be blaming the "lefties" stifling their "free speech". When it comes to a left wing protest being cancelled because your fellow travellers have threatened to come and knock some heads together, its the fault of the party cancelling. Free speech is only for the right.
What desperate rubbish. The far left has already committed violence and vandalism:
That's more than 60 police officers injured in your supposedly 'peaceful' protests!
Compared to that, you'll forgive me if I give little weight to the supposed threats of right-wing violence, for which we have only the word of the side that has already committed violence.
See that mass of earth flying overhead? That's the moral high ground racing away from you.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
LOL......
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
Yes the Quran too. Its a product of its time and quite a nasty and unpleasant one too by modern standards like many products of that time.
Unless it turns out that his illness has caused him to be permanently disabled, Boris isn't going anywhere, despite the wishful thinking of his opponents. Yes, Covid and its after-effects are going to make the next couple of years a nightmare across the Western world, but that’s unavoidable whoever the leader is, and there’s plenty of opportunity to get back to a semblance of good times by 2024.
As for ephemeral polls, the current orgy of cultural vandalism has interrupted Labour’s rise as the public wakes up to what the fuck they may be voting into power, as yesterday’s Survation suggests...
One solitary statue of a mass murderer gets unlawfully taken down, the rightists of PB call it an “orgy of cultural vandalism” and imply the Labour Party is to blame. In the meantime, we will have around 60,000 excess deaths as a result of the Government’s muddled response, more than any comparable country on an aggregate or per capita basis, and the worst economic downturn in the industrialised world, but that’s “unavoidable whoever the leader is”. In the words of one commentator here “you couldn’t make it up”.
One solitary statue taken down by a violent mob explicitly celebrated by Labour MP Nadia Whittome:
Note her exact words about a future Labour Government:
'I celebrate these acts of resistance.'
'We need a movement that will tear down systemic racism and the slave owner statues that symbolise it. And we need to win a government that will always be on the side of this movement.'
The statue's vandals have published a hit list of dozens more across the country to destroy, and they've already defaced many more, including Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.
Meanwhile, Labour mayors and councils across the country are jumping at the opportunity to 'review' their local monuments, and in the case of Sadiq Khan, to just send in the JCBs as he did with Milligan.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves about the left's intentions.
And I’m afraid the numbers speak for themselves as to the number of people your party has negligently allowed to die these last three months. Are you on the side of living humans or statues? The impression you give is that you give more of a damn about chunks of metal celebrating mass murderers like Coulson and Milligan than the people of this country. But I am sure that is not the case.
I'm sure the eventual public inquiry will establish exactly what occurred in this unprecendented global pandemic and the extent to which deaths could or could not have been avoided. Of course, you have all the answers now, thanks to your handy time machine.
'Living humans or statues' isn't a mutually-exclusive choice, by the way. One can want to save as many lives as possible from the pandemic, as the Government is doing, while deploring the violence and cultural vandalism of the far left. People have noticed what they're about, and it doesn't look as though they like it...
You base your entire paranoid polemic on one tweet from one Labour MP and a single Survation Poll that still shows your party’s support far more than halved in a month. As for “time machine” - you forget I borrowed yours, you know the one you use to predict elections? In the meantime the below tweets represent the actual views of the Labour Party - and most people in this country
David Lammy has - to my amazement - won my respect on this occasion. He explicitly said that he doesn't condone violence and riots AND that he would not march with BLM because that would make him a hypocrite after criticizing Cummings.
As for Starmer, on the other hand, actions speak louder than words. Two days after the illegal actions of that mob, he and dozens of Labour MPs put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the protesters.
If they didn't mean to lend their implicit support to illegal acts of violence then literally kneeling before a movement that had perpetrated them very publicly a couple of days earlier was a funny way of showing it...
They were kneeling in support of a movement protesting the racist torture murder of a black civilian by the police of our closest ally. That is what the protests are about, not some imagined “cultural vandalism”, which is a straw man minor by product emphasised by people such as yourself to divert attention from the real issues that need highlighting. But of course you place an equivalence on preserving the memory of the dead enslavers of Black people rather than the actual lives of their living descendants.
There is literally no comparison between the US and UK on this score, so importing the context of their racial conflicts to this country makes absolutely no sense. Here are the figures to prove it:
Since 1870, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.
In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. That's 5x as many deaths caused by police in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK!
Funny how the USA is suddenly our 'closest ally' for lefties when they want to import their cultural conflicts, but they want absolutely nothing to do with them at any other time...
"Taking the knee" is an alternative to violent protest. The fact that Colin Kaepernick tried it and lost his career means that some people have gone further because, clearly, it didn't work. The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage.
You can peacefully protest what happens on Mars for all I care. It's when the protesters turn violent, assault the police, and commit criminal damage that it becomes illicit - as is now clearly the case.
'between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police were reported), 69 were from BME communities – 18%'
Otherwise known as fewer than 3 individuals per year in the latter group. There should be obviously be as few deaths in police custody as possible, but those figures are no reason for nationwide unrest.
'The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage'
That's some heroic spin indeed. Tell me, if a mob of Brexiteers had destroyed an EU monument - and put out a list of dozens more targets they intended to destroy - and then Boris and dozens of Conservative MPs had put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the Brexiteers, would your interpretation be as generous?
Somehow I think not.
Deaths at police hands are unusual in this country, and deaths at police hands where the police officers concerned have committed a crime are very unusual. The officer who killed Azelle Rodney was prosecuted for murder and acquitted. Having read about the case, I don't think the officer gunned the man down just because he was black.
I wonder in ths same period how many black people under 25 have been killed by black people under 25. I am still struggling with the concept of the BLM movement when they never mention black people killing black people. The murders at the weekend were just ignored.
You "struggle with the concept" of an anti-racism movement that concentrates on highlighting racism?
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
I am pretty certain there will be no extension but also no "WTO" Brexit.
I expect an "interim deal" by the year-end which keeps things closely aligned into 2021, with suitable wording about "selective divergence" being on the table for future negotiation.
An extension without an extension in other words.
I suspect now that the government will largely fold, as it did in 2019. This will be proclaimed a triumph, as it was in 2019. The difference is that Tory MPs will have more time to absorb what has been agreed to.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
I'm naively assuming that the main reason for not extending now is to avoid any liability for the EU coronavirus recovery fund.
If we are not liable for it now, why would continuing the status quo make any difference?
Because it'll be in the new budget cycle.
I am sure there is a deal to be done on the basis of a negotiated fixed payment that continues our existing terms and doesn’t expose the UK to further unspecified liabilities. You sit in Dubai and continue to froth about the EU if you must, but in the real world an extension is clearly in our country’s interest.
If I were to guess, any payment would be based on the going rate for membership in the new budget cycle. Those payment are likely to be higher in the next cycle to fund their recovery fund. I don't think that's a controversial statement?
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
It should probably have the standard disclaimer:
"This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental."
The chance of talks intenifying had the UK extended: 0%
Precisely why an extension would be an awful idea.
I quite agree. The UK has already folded its position and shown that the EU (indeed the entire world), will get prefernetial access to UK markets from 1 January 2021:
The Tariff schedule the UK arranged an intern to produce has gone in the bin and it has now taken the sovereign decision to be a rule-taker of tarrifs when exporting its goods and won't be charging any on incoming goods.
I expect the EU to time out the talks to ensure that this is the arrangment going forwards.
Having no import tarrifs is an interesting decision. Good for consumers perhaps, but not much negotiating leverage.
Why would the German carmakers and Italian prosecco growers ride to our rescue if they had no tarrifs already?
Precisely, the timing makes no sense they could have announced this when it became obvious that crashing out was imminent in November.
Doing it now demonstrates that the UK won't even try and bluff an already critically weak hand.
I understand the fantasy parts of Brexit and even the incompetent parts but this is actively self-destructive.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Fuck off. There are serious risks of disruption to medical supplies, previously acknowledged by the government, in the event of a disorderly break with the EU. But you deny this possibility because it gets in the way of your ability properly to hate the EU. You’re sickeningly cavalier in your indulgence of your prejudices. Fuck off.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
LOL......
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
Yes the Quran too. Its a product of its time and quite a nasty and unpleasant one too by modern standards like many products of that time.
Divide and conquer, it's the route to power. The marxists behind BLM know it well. The pawns are attacking each other
But who are the puppet masters pulling the strings of the DFLA* and what political philosophy do they espouse?
* The acronym confers a little more gravitas, I feel, so I'm awarding them it for balance viz a vis BLM. "The DFLA" smacks of living rough in the forests of England, tooled up and waiting for the call. Serious business.
I'd say they were more reactionaries than political philosophers. A fair dose of racism thrown in too
That rings true to me. Do you know any as a matter of interest?
He used to work for Keith Joseph, so I assume he is a Tory or at least used to be. He helped to write Joseph's infamous Edgbaston speech (in which Joseph warned about letting the poor breed).
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
and continues to be the most useless thing regularly given to people about to be stranded on a desert island.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
It should probably have the standard disclaimer:
"This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental."
People are going to have to get used to the idea of switching between 2m and 1m, perhaps more than once, I think. Quite obviously government will try to ease restriction as soon as they can - but might well have to re-impose them, if case numbers head upwards again at a later date. Anything but another lockdown.
In the past few weeks, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has distributed grants from the £50m Reopening High Streets Safely Fund to councils across England, to be used on signage and barriers on streets and in shops.
Tudor Evans, the Labour leader of Plymouth council, which has received £235,000 from the fund, said it had been used for large numbers of discs on street surfaces indicating 2-metre distances, and to help hundreds of shops prepare. These measures would need to be redone if the distance was reduced.
“If it changes in the next few weeks it will make people angry,” Evans said. “A lot of people have sent a lot of time in the public sector, and in the private sector, to get things ready for opening up in accordance with government regulations. To have this uncertainty, this close to opening, is really an emblem for how chaotic the government’s handling has been.”
Andrew Goodacre, the chief executive of the British Independent Retailers Association, which represents smaller shops, said any reduction would receive a mixed reception from members...
Am I the only one who thinks that a social distance of 1m from two is sensible because it doesn’t need extensive remarking. Just put it halfway between the other markers
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Fuck off. There are serious risks of disruption to medical supplies, previously acknowledged by the government, in the event of a disorderly break with the EU. But you deny this possibility because it gets in the way of your ability properly to hate the EU. You’re sickeningly cavalier in your indulgence of your prejudices. Fuck off.
There's risks to everything in life. The wise thing to do is appreciate what the risks are and work to mitigate them, not to hide in terror.
You really are acting like an agorophobiac. Afraid to step out of your cosy home because the big wide world is a scary place.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Fuck off. There are serious risks of disruption to medical supplies, previously acknowledged by the government, in the event of a disorderly break with the EU. But you deny this possibility because it gets in the way of your ability properly to hate the EU. You’re sickeningly cavalier in your indulgence of your prejudices. Fuck off.
There's risks to everything in life. The wise thing to do is appreciate what the risks are and work to mitigate them, not to hide in terror.
You really are acting like an agorophobiac. Afraid to step out of your cosy home because the big wide world is a scary place.
You have my sympathies.
You’re happy to take risks with my partner’s life. Fuck off and crawl back under the rock you came from, you odious toad.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
LOL......
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
Yes the Quran too. Its a product of its time and quite a nasty and unpleasant one too by modern standards like many products of that time.
Boris on the Koran back in 2005:
"The proposed ban on incitement to “religious hatred” makes no sense unless it involves a ban on the Koran itself; and that would be pretty absurd, when you consider that the Bill's intention is to fight Islamophobia." - Boris, in The Daily Telegraph 21 July 2005.
Once the idiotic precedent of cultural vandalism has been set, it's hardly a surprise that other idiotic vandals would respond in kind. I condemn them all, unequivocally.
Perhaps it would have been better not to have set the precedent in the first place, eh?
"The Gresham’s law of extremism, that the more extreme drives out the less extreme, is one of the basic rules of political mechanics which operate in this field: it is a corollary of the general principle that no political power exists without being used.
Both the general law and its Gresham’s corollary point, in contemporary circumstances, towards the resort to physical violence, in the form of firearms or high explosive, as being so probable as to be predicted with virtual certainty. The experience of the last decade and more, all round the world, shows that acts of violence, however apparently irrational or inappropriate their targets, precipitate a frenzied search on the part of the society attacked to discover and remedy more and more grievances, real or imaginary, among those from the violence is supposed to emanate or on whose behalf it is supposed to be exercised"
The chance of talks intenifying had the UK extended: 0%
Precisely why an extension would be an awful idea.
I quite agree. The UK has already folded its position and shown that the EU (indeed the entire world), will get prefernetial access to UK markets from 1 January 2021:
The Tariff schedule the UK arranged an intern to produce has gone in the bin and it has now taken the sovereign decision to be a rule-taker of tarrifs when exporting its goods and won't be charging any on incoming goods.
I expect the EU to time out the talks to ensure that this is the arrangment going forwards.
Having no import tarrifs is an interesting decision. Good for consumers perhaps, but not much negotiating leverage.
Why would the German carmakers and Italian prosecco growers ride to our rescue if they had no tarrifs already?
Precisely, the timing makes no sense they could have announced this when it became obvious that crashing out was imminent in November.
Doing it now demonstrates that the UK won't even try and bluff an already critically weak hand.
I understand the fantasy parts of Brexit and even the incompetent parts but this is actively self-destructive.
Under WTO rules we have to offer the same to everyone. It can't just be for the EU. The government does seem to be very focused on destroying British businesses. It's a fascinating strategy.
People are going to have to get used to the idea of switching between 2m and 1m, perhaps more than once, I think. Quite obviously government will try to ease restriction as soon as they can - but might well have to re-impose them, if case numbers head upwards again at a later date. Anything but another lockdown.
In the past few weeks, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has distributed grants from the £50m Reopening High Streets Safely Fund to councils across England, to be used on signage and barriers on streets and in shops.
Tudor Evans, the Labour leader of Plymouth council, which has received £235,000 from the fund, said it had been used for large numbers of discs on street surfaces indicating 2-metre distances, and to help hundreds of shops prepare. These measures would need to be redone if the distance was reduced.
“If it changes in the next few weeks it will make people angry,” Evans said. “A lot of people have sent a lot of time in the public sector, and in the private sector, to get things ready for opening up in accordance with government regulations. To have this uncertainty, this close to opening, is really an emblem for how chaotic the government’s handling has been.”
Andrew Goodacre, the chief executive of the British Independent Retailers Association, which represents smaller shops, said any reduction would receive a mixed reception from members...
Am I the only one who thinks that a social distance of 1m from two is sensible because it doesn’t need extensive remarking. Just put it halfway between the other markers
The thought had occurred.
I don't think the 2 metre guidance should be dropped for instance in the supermarket queue just because restaurant tables might be spaced closer. You're heading to the supermarket because you need to, the restaurant because you want to. An important distinction.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
LOL......
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
Yes the Quran too. Its a product of its time and quite a nasty and unpleasant one too by modern standards like many products of that time.
Boris on the Koran back in 2005:
"The proposed ban on incitement to “religious hatred” makes no sense unless it involves a ban on the Koran itself; and that would be pretty absurd, when you consider that the Bill's intention is to fight Islamophobia." - Boris, in The Daily Telegraph 21 July 2005.
Divide and conquer, it's the route to power. The marxists behind BLM know it well. The pawns are attacking each other
But who are the puppet masters pulling the strings of the DFLA* and what political philosophy do they espouse?
* The acronym confers a little more gravitas, I feel, so I'm awarding them it for balance viz a vis BLM. "The DFLA" smacks of living rough in the forests of England, tooled up and waiting for the call. Serious business.
I'd say they were more reactionaries than political philosophers. A fair dose of racism thrown in too
I am interested in their democratic structures. Are they as democratic as North Korea?
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
and continues to be the most useless thing regularly given to people about to be stranded on a desert island.
I dunno. Most people would benefit from reading it. The KJV is as rich as Shakespeare in its use of language, and the philosophical discussions an inexhaustible source of inspiration. You don't need to be a believer to think it worth a read.
Unless it turns out that his illness has caused him to be permanently disabled, Boris isn't going anywhere, despite the wishful thinking of his opponents. Yes, Covid and its after-effects are going to make the next couple of years a nightmare across the Western world, but that’s unavoidable whoever the leader is, and there’s plenty of opportunity to get back to a semblance of good times by 2024.
As for ephemeral polls, the current orgy of cultural vandalism has interrupted Labour’s rise as the public wakes up to what the fuck they may be voting into power, as yesterday’s Survation suggests...
One solitary statue of a mass murderer gets unlawfully taken down, the rightists of PB call it an “orgy of cultural vandalism” and imply the Labour Party is to blame. In the meantime, we will have around 60,000 excess deaths as a result of the Government’s muddled response, more than any comparable country on an aggregate or per capita basis, and the worst economic downturn in the industrialised world, but that’s “unavoidable whoever the leader is”. In the words of one commentator here “you couldn’t make it up”.
One solitary statue taken down by a violent mob explicitly celebrated by Labour MP Nadia Whittome:
Note her exact words about a future Labour Government:
'I celebrate these acts of resistance.'
'We need a movement that will tear down systemic racism and the slave owner statues that symbolise it. And we need to win a government that will always be on the side of this movement.'
The statue's vandals have published a hit list of dozens more across the country to destroy, and they've already defaced many more, including Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.
Meanwhile, Labour mayors and councils across the country are jumping at the opportunity to 'review' their local monuments, and in the case of Sadiq Khan, to just send in the JCBs as he did with Milligan.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves about the left's intentions.
And I’m afraid the numbers speak for themselves as to the number of people your party has negligently allowed to die these last three months. Are you on the side of living humans or statues? The impression you give is that you give more of a damn about chunks of metal celebrating mass murderers like Coulson and Milligan than the people of this country. But I am sure that is not the case.
I'm sure the eventual public inquiry will establish exactly what occurred in this unprecendented global pandemic and the extent to which deaths could or could not have been avoided. Of course, you have all the answers now, thanks to your handy time machine.
'Living humans or statues' isn't a mutually-exclusive choice, by the way. One can want to save as many lives as possible from the pandemic, as the Government is doing, while deploring the violence and cultural vandalism of the far left. People have noticed what they're about, and it doesn't look as though they like it...
You base your entire paranoid polemic on one tweet from one Labour MP and a single Survation Poll that still shows your party’s support far more than halved in a month. As for “time machine” - you forget I borrowed yours, you know the one you use to predict elections? In the meantime the below tweets represent the actual views of the Labour Party - and most people in this country
David Lammy has - to my amazement - won my respect on this occasion. He explicitly said that he doesn't condone violence and riots AND that he would not march with BLM because that would make him a hypocrite after criticizing Cummings.
As for Starmer, on the other hand, actions speak louder than words. Two days after the illegal actions of that mob, he and dozens of Labour MPs put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the protesters.
If they didn't mean to lend their implicit support to illegal acts of violence then literally kneeling before a movement that had perpetrated them very publicly a couple of days earlier was a funny way of showing it...
They were kneeling in support of a movement protesting the racist torture murder of a black civilian by the police of our closest ally. That is what the protests are about, not some imagined “cultural vandalism”, which is a straw man minor by product emphasised by people such as yourself to divert attention from the real issues that need highlighting. But of course you place an equivalence on preserving the memory of the dead enslavers of Black people rather than the actual lives of their living descendants.
There is literally no comparison between the US and UK on this score, so importing the context of their racial conflicts to this country makes absolutely no sense. Here are the figures to prove it:
Since 1870, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.
In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. That's 5x as many deaths caused by police in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK!
Funny how the USA is suddenly our 'closest ally' for lefties when they want to import their cultural conflicts, but they want absolutely nothing to do with them at any other time...
"Taking the knee" is an alternative to violent protest. The fact that Colin Kaepernick tried it and lost his career means that some people have gone further because, clearly, it didn't work. The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage.
You can peacefully protest what happens on Mars for all I care. It's when the protesters turn violent, assault the police, and commit criminal damage that it becomes illicit - as is now clearly the case.
'between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police were reported), 69 were from BME communities – 18%'
Otherwise known as fewer than 3 individuals per year in the latter group. There should be obviously be as few deaths in police custody as possible, but those figures are no reason for nationwide unrest.
'The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage'
That's some heroic spin indeed. Tell me, if a mob of Brexiteers had destroyed an EU monument - and put out a list of dozens more targets they intended to destroy - and then Boris and dozens of Conservative MPs had put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the Brexiteers, would your interpretation be as generous?
Somehow I think not.
Deaths at police hands are unusual in this country, and deaths at police hands where the police officers concerned have committed a crime are very unusual. The officer who killed Azelle Rodney was prosecuted for murder and acquitted. Having read about the case, I don't think the officer gunned the man down just because he was black.
I wonder in ths same period how many black people under 25 have been killed by black people under 25. I am still struggling with the concept of the BLM movement when they never mention black people killing black people. The murders at the weekend were just ignored.
You "struggle with the concept" of an anti-racism movement that concentrates on highlighting racism?
I struggle with the concept of an organisation called Black Lives Matter than isn't really about black lives mattering.
If it was about black lives mattering would actually be asking the police to come down far more heavily on the black people cutting a swathe through black communities of America in a well documented explosion of violence and murder that far outweighs anything anybody in the white community could do,
Instead black lives matter is facilitating the acceleration of that explosion by what we see in Mineapolis and Seattle. Chicago too. The protests coincided with a bloodbath of black on black murders there last week end.
On the subject of interpreting authors of the past and interpreting them using modern v outdated standards this is not a new idea and is something we've done as long as I recall. It can cut both ways too.
In my Literature classes in High School I studied Merchant of Venice and had to write an essay on Shylock's speech "If you prick us, do we not bleed?" - which looking at it from its era and in full context is far more complicated than superficially taking it as it first glance appears as to be an enlightened argument against antisemitism.
I left Shakespeare out of my list, because he was more nuanced (well, perhaps not in the case of Aaron the Moor, but Titus Andronicus is just a splatterfest anyway).
Reading the racist abuse directed at Othello, for example, "an old black ram is tupping your white ewe", "the thicklips", I think that author did expect the audience to feel disgust at Iago.
It's grimly funny to read old commentaries that went to great lengths to try to deny that Othello was in fact, black.
Divide and conquer, it's the route to power. The marxists behind BLM know it well. The pawns are attacking each other
But who are the puppet masters pulling the strings of the DFLA* and what political philosophy do they espouse?
* The acronym confers a little more gravitas, I feel, so I'm awarding them it for balance viz a vis BLM. "The DFLA" smacks of living rough in the forests of England, tooled up and waiting for the call. Serious business.
I'd say they were more reactionaries than political philosophers. A fair dose of racism thrown in too
That rings true to me. Do you know any as a matter of interest?
A lot of people who fit that description, but not anyone in this Fan Alliance as far as I know
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Fuck off. There are serious risks of disruption to medical supplies, previously acknowledged by the government, in the event of a disorderly break with the EU. But you deny this possibility because it gets in the way of your ability properly to hate the EU. You’re sickeningly cavalier in your indulgence of your prejudices. Fuck off.
There's risks to everything in life. The wise thing to do is appreciate what the risks are and work to mitigate them, not to hide in terror.
You really are acting like an agorophobiac. Afraid to step out of your cosy home because the big wide world is a scary place.
You have my sympathies.
You’re happy to take risks with my partner’s life. Fuck off and crawl back under the rock you came from, you odious toad.
There's risks to everyone's life every day.
You can be as nasty and as rude as you like, you just belittle yourself doing that. I'm not sinking to your level, I'm rising above it. I feel sorry for you that you're so blinded by hatred and fear you can't move on.
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
I am pretty certain that there will be no extension but also no "WTO" Brexit.
I expect an "interim deal" by the year-end which keeps things closely aligned into 2021, with suitable wording about "selective divergence" being on the table for future negotiation.
An extension without an extension in other words.
In other words that would be a deal.
If it involves no money, no free movement, the ability to diverge while keeping trade free then that would be an incredible deal don't you think? Better than membership surely?
A deal, yes. Otherwise you would either have an Extension or a WTO Brexit, both of which I can assure you are Not Happening events.
Better or worse than membership? Worse, I would predict. There will be money involved to keep frictionless trade and we will be rule-takers. OTOH, no FM. At least not in theory.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Fuck off. There are serious risks of disruption to medical supplies, previously acknowledged by the government, in the event of a disorderly break with the EU. But you deny this possibility because it gets in the way of your ability properly to hate the EU. You’re sickeningly cavalier in your indulgence of your prejudices. Fuck off.
There's risks to everything in life. The wise thing to do is appreciate what the risks are and work to mitigate them, not to hide in terror.
You really are acting like an agorophobiac. Afraid to step out of your cosy home because the big wide world is a scary place.
You have my sympathies.
You’re happy to take risks with my partner’s life. Fuck off and crawl back under the rock you came from, you odious toad.
Alastair, I`m no leaver and think that some of your posts and headers on this site are the best there is, but I have said a couple of times before that your anti-Brexit posts have long since looked like they are coming directly from personal interest. I was puzzled as to what this personal interest is. Sympathies to you and your partner but your posts today confirm that I was right.
It occurs to me that if you wanted to frame BLM, and turn people against them, that's the kind of statue you would target.
I expect that will be the response of our resident nationalist posters as well.
It's not impossible of course. However so far we have far more evidence that these people are sincere.
Logic fail. If it wasn't BLM then the latter's sincertity is not relevant.
Bruce is not an obvious target - historically or in the stuff published recvently, e.g. the map of target statues (by the Stop Trump people?) which had some far more obvious targets in Scotland which were specific to the issues raised by BLM.
I meant the same people who targeted Churchill and Gandhi.
Lots of things aren’t obvious targets. But these people don’t discriminate.
You’d do well at least ask yourself first why this movement might be getting out of control before exercising supreme cognitive dissonance because them targeting icons you treasure doesn’t fit.
That's more than 60 police officers injured in your supposedly 'peaceful' protests!
Compared to that, you'll forgive me if I give little weight to the supposed threats of right-wing violence, for which we have only the word of the side that has already committed violence.
See that mass of earth flying overhead? That's the moral high ground racing away from you.
I can easily visualise your face over your computer screen trying desperately to defend the indefensible.
You'll forgive me if I take those statistics from the ...erm...National Police Chiefs’ Council (who say 60 officers were hurt "one way or another" - a peculiar phrasing) with a pinch of salt given the right wing disinformation campaign, of which you are a part, has invented threats of an "orgy" mass cultural destruction by BLM, and posted images of injured police officers from 2016 onwards, not related to the BLM protests, indeed being pro-Timmy Robinson protests, as being from the recent demonstrations - https://fullfact.org/online/blm-protest-london-pictures/
Doubtless you will give as much credence to the statistics promulgated by the NPCC via the Standard as you will the claims of police brutality made by Black Protest Legal Support through the same paper? Or is is a police chiefs advocacy group more trustworthy than a black advocacy group?
The truth is that the so-called "violence" of these protests, which are in fact more peaceful than many othe protests over the years, is invented by the right to detract from the ongoing public health catastrophe that evidence increasingly shows has been caused by the negligence of the government the right supports.
If you frame this as the “don’t mention the war” episode but don’t quote the scene about “ni**ers” and “wogs” then it obviously seems absurd. If you call it the “ni**ers and wogs episode” it might make people think. https://t.co/EQAvEVBF0K
So I’ve not been on for a long while - the constant bickering of my children that I am home schooling during lockdown does not need adding to with the pointless partisan posting on here.
I live in a small town near Bristol, and the arguments I see on here are nothing like those being had by the vast majority of my contacts. There was a squabble as to whether Colston statue was removed properly, some of the more left wing agreeing a mob should do it others agreeing that it should already have been taken down by Labour controlled Bristol City Council, who decided that a plaque would do, which was then cancelled by the Black mayor.
The only things I hear about continued protests are that the people protesting are idiots and don’t they respect the NHS workers?
I am also a scout leader and can report that the Facebook group I am part of related to that had to take all the posts down about statues as they didn’t want to set of a Facebook algorithm and get taken down!
Support for the government tends to follow party lines but the excess death reports seem only to percolate from very left wing freinds in Bristol. My wife who hates Boris cannot understand why a scientist who was part of the recommnedation to not lock down initially is now generating such headlines after his sacking and changing view. She is a local government officer and fully supported the initial approach of the government following their scientific advisers. What else could they do in the face of an unknown health emergency?
It seems strange to me that last year a lot of the people who are now criticising the government were saying they should follow the advice of experts.
The closure of our high street by the local Tory district council in order to aid social distancing has generated far more heated debate than any national story although if the town had statues of racists then that might be different.
Not sure I will be back on here for a while. PB used to provide a better level of insight than the news but the headers are Boris derangement syndrome personified - has Mike ever written a piece that highlighted good news for Boris?, and the comments which used to show a balance and at least some respect for those of the opposing view seem to have vanished. The only really significant story in the last few weeks for me was Cummings. If he had been spad to any party leader he did the wrong thing and shouldn’t have been supported. But government action in the face of an unprecedented global pandemic seems to have been as reasonable as could be expected. Not particularly well communicated or good but competent in the circumstances and despite individual decisions and policies not being right decisions seem to have been made with relevant scientific advice and to the best ability at the time.
Unless it turns out that his illness has caused him to be permanently disabled, Boris isn't going anywhere, despite the wishful thinking of his opponents. Yes, Covid and its after-effects are going to make the next couple of years a nightmare across the Western world, but that’s unavoidable whoever the leader is, and there’s plenty of opportunity to get back to a semblance of good times by 2024.
As for ephemeral polls, the current orgy of cultural vandalism has interrupted Labour’s rise as the public wakes up to what the fuck they may be voting into power, as yesterday’s Survation suggests...
One solitary statue of a mass murderer gets unlawfully taken down, the rightists of PB call it an “orgy of cultural vandalism” and imply the Labour Party is to blame. In the meantime, we will have around 60,000 excess deaths as a result of the Government’s muddled response, more than any comparable country on an aggregate or per capita basis, and the worst economic downturn in the industrialised world, but that’s “unavoidable whoever the leader is”. In the words of one commentator here “you couldn’t make it up”.
One solitary statue taken down by a violent mob explicitly celebrated by Labour MP Nadia Whittome:
Note her exact words about a future Labour Government:
'I celebrate these acts of resistance.'
'We need a movement that will tear down systemic racism and the slave owner statues that symbolise it. And we need to win a government that will always be on the side of this movement.'
The statue's vandals have published a hit list of dozens more across the country to destroy, and they've already defaced many more, including Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.
Meanwhile, Labour mayors and councils across the country are jumping at the opportunity to 'review' their local monuments, and in the case of Sadiq Khan, to just send in the JCBs as he did with Milligan.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves about the left's intentions.
And I’m afraid the numbers speak for themselves as to the number of people your party has negligently allowed to die these last three months. Are you on the side of living humans or statues? The impression you give is that you give more of a damn about chunks of metal celebrating mass murderers like Coulson and Milligan than the people of this country. But I am sure that is not the case.
I'm sure the eventual public inquiry will establish exactly what occurred in this unprecendented global pandemic and the extent to which deaths could or could not have been avoided. Of course, you have all the answers now, thanks to your handy time machine.
'Living humans or statues' isn't a mutually-exclusive choice, by the way. One can want to save as many lives as possible from the pandemic, as the Government is doing, while deploring the violence and cultural vandalism of the far left. People have noticed what they're about, and it doesn't look as though they like it...
You base your entire paranoid polemic on one tweet from one Labour MP and a single Survation Poll that still shows your party’s support far more than halved in a month. As for “time machine” - you forget I borrowed yours, you know the one you use to predict elections? In the meantime the below tweets represent the actual views of the Labour Party - and most people in this country
David Lammy has - to my amazement - won my respect on this occasion. He explicitly said that he doesn't condone violence and riots AND that he would not march with BLM because that would make him a hypocrite after criticizing Cummings.
As for Starmer, on the other hand, actions speak louder than words. Two days after the illegal actions of that mob, he and dozens of Labour MPs put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the protesters.
If they didn't mean to lend their implicit support to illegal acts of violence then literally kneeling before a movement that had perpetrated them very publicly a couple of days earlier was a funny way of showing it...
They were kneeling in support of a movement protesting the racist torture murder of a black civilian by the police of our closest ally. That is what the protests are about, not some imagined “cultural vandalism”, which is a straw man minor by product emphasised by people such as yourself to divert attention from the real issues that need highlighting. But of course you place an equivalence on preserving the memory of the dead enslavers of Black people rather than the actual lives of their living descendants.
There is literally no comparison between the US and UK on this score, so importing the context of their racial conflicts to this country makes absolutely no sense. Here are the figures to prove it:
Since 1870, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.
In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. That's 5x as many deaths caused by police in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK!
Funny how the USA is suddenly our 'closest ally' for lefties when they want to import their cultural conflicts, but they want absolutely nothing to do with them at any other time...
"Taking the knee" is an alternative to violent protest. The fact that Colin Kaepernick tried it and lost his career means that some people have gone further because, clearly, it didn't work. The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage.
You can peacefully protest what happens on Mars for all I care. It's when the protesters turn violent, assault the police, and commit criminal damage that it becomes illicit - as is now clearly the case.
'between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police were reported), 69 were from BME communities – 18%'
Otherwise known as fewer than 3 individuals per year in the latter group. There should be obviously be as few deaths in police custody as possible, but those figures are no reason for nationwide unrest.
'The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage'
That's some heroic spin indeed. Tell me, if a mob of Brexiteers had destroyed an EU monument - and put out a list of dozens more targets they intended to destroy - and then Boris and dozens of Conservative MPs had put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the Brexiteers, would your interpretation be as generous?
Somehow I think not.
Deaths at police hands are unusual in this country, and deaths at police hands where the police officers concerned have committed a crime are very unusual. The officer who killed Azelle Rodney was prosecuted for murder and acquitted. Having read about the case, I don't think the officer gunned the man down just because he was black.
I wonder in ths same period how many black people under 25 have been killed by black people under 25. I am still struggling with the concept of the BLM movement when they never mention black people killing black people. The murders at the weekend were just ignored.
You "struggle with the concept" of an anti-racism movement that concentrates on highlighting racism?
I struggle with the concept of an organisation called Black Lives Matter than isn't really about black lives mattering.
If it was about black lives mattering would actually be asking the police to come down far more heavily on the black people cutting a swathe through black communities of America in a well documented explosion of violence and murder that far outweighs anything anybody in the white community could do,
Instead black lives matter is facilitating the acceleration of that explosion by what we see in Mineapolis and Seattle. Chicago too. The protests coincided with a bloodbath of black on black murders there last week end.
Perhaps if the police behaved more appropriately in the black communities then they would be trusted on gang crime rather more. From what I see, black communities are very concerned over gang and drug crime, but past experience inhibits their attitude to policing, particularly aggressive militarised policing.
Not so much a comment on the Cummings escapade, more an example of the pettiness of some of those at the heart of goverrnment by dropping the nurse for expressing an opinion that was not on message.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
LOL......
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
Why are we pretending to be wary about criticizing parts of the Quran?
The silence from those Leavers on the site who angrily denounced me when I pointed out that the government was not going to let a mere pandemic delay its timetable is telling.
But I expect they’ve all rewritten their memories by now.
Not a leaver, but will hold my hand up to say I thought we would quietly agree an extension. Overall I'm starting to think I've seriously overestimated the competence of this government.
I am pretty certain that there will be no extension but also no "WTO" Brexit.
I expect an "interim deal" by the year-end which keeps things closely aligned into 2021, with suitable wording about "selective divergence" being on the table for future negotiation.
An extension without an extension in other words.
In other words that would be a deal.
If it involves no money, no free movement, the ability to diverge while keeping trade free then that would be an incredible deal don't you think? Better than membership surely?
A deal, yes. Otherwise you would either have an Extension or a WTO Brexit, both of which I can assure you are Not Happening events.
Better or worse than membership? Worse, I would predict. There will be money involved to keep frictionless trade and we will be rule-takers. OTOH, no FM. At least not in theory.
I think you're going to hate it but we will see.
Its gonna be YUUGE! Its gonna be beauuuuuuuutiful! Its gonna be the best deal in this history of deals!
Seems the EU have formally accepted this decision despite Scotts wall to wall campaign to stop brexit
And you were the guy that, once upon a time, was so adamant that we couldn’t afford to risk crashing out without a deal.
Time for the deal now.
No more bluffing this is real and I expect the EU to compromise under Merkel's presidency
Lol @ ‘no more bluffing’
Correct me if I am wrong, but you are the PB’er who spent months posting here about the evil and risks of Boris and a no deal exit, then ate your own words long enough to actually vote for Boris to be our PM, then after a few months tries to return to the position you held originally?
It would, but it wasn’t what the episode was about.
I think either carrying a heavy warning at the start, or editing that particular bit out, before reinstating it would be acceptable to most.
Agreed 100%. That's what I suggested too.
The warning doesn't even need to be that heavy. The one Disney did with Dumbo was quite tasteful, blink and you'd miss it. That's the solution for dated products IMHO not canning them entirely.
So I’ve not been on for a long while - the constant bickering of my children that I am home schooling during lockdown does not need adding to with the pointless partisan posting on here.
I live in a small town near Bristol, and the arguments I see on here are nothing like those being had by the vast majority of my contacts. There was a squabble as to whether Colston statue was removed properly, some of the more left wing agreeing a mob should do it others agreeing that it should already have been taken down by Labour controlled Bristol City Council, who decided that a plaque would do, which was then cancelled by the Black mayor.
The only things I hear about continued protests are that the people protesting are idiots and don’t they respect the NHS workers?
I am also a scout leader and can report that the Facebook group I am part of related to that had to take all the posts down about statues as they didn’t want to set of a Facebook algorithm and get taken down!
Support for the government tends to follow party lines but the excess death reports seem only to percolate from very left wing freinds in Bristol. My wife who hates Boris cannot understand why a scientist who was part of the recommnedation to not lock down initially is now generating such headlines after his sacking and changing view. She is a local government officer and fully supported the initial approach of the government following their scientific advisers. What else could they do in the face of an unknown health emergency?
It seems strange to me that last year a lot of the people who are now criticising the government were saying they should follow the advice of experts.
The closure of our high street by the local Tory district council in order to aid social distancing has generated far more heated debate than any national story although if the town had statues of racists then that might be different.
Not sure I will be back on here for a while. PB used to provide a better level of insight than the news but the headers are Boris derangement syndrome personified - has Mike ever written a piece that highlighted good news for Boris?, and the comments which used to show a balance and at least some respect for those of the opposing view seem to have vanished. The only really significant story in the last few weeks for me was Cummings. If he had been spad to any party leader he did the wrong thing and shouldn’t have been supported. But government action in the face of an unprecedented global pandemic seems to have been as reasonable as could be expected. Not particularly well communicated or good but competent in the circumstances and despite individual decisions and policies not being right decisions seem to have been made with relevant scientific advice and to the best ability at the time.
A lot of good stuff in there. Please keep posting. With regard to Mike`s headers: always remember that Mike is a LibDem activist.
So I’ve not been on for a long while - the constant bickering of my children that I am home schooling during lockdown does not need adding to with the pointless partisan posting on here.
I live in a small town near Bristol, and the arguments I see on here are nothing like those being had by the vast majority of my contacts. There was a squabble as to whether Colston statue was removed properly, some of the more left wing agreeing a mob should do it others agreeing that it should already have been taken down by Labour controlled Bristol City Council, who decided that a plaque would do, which was then cancelled by the Black mayor.
The only things I hear about continued protests are that the people protesting are idiots and don’t they respect the NHS workers?
I am also a scout leader and can report that the Facebook group I am part of related to that had to take all the posts down about statues as they didn’t want to set of a Facebook algorithm and get taken down!
Support for the government tends to follow party lines but the excess death reports seem only to percolate from very left wing freinds in Bristol. My wife who hates Boris cannot understand why a scientist who was part of the recommnedation to not lock down initially is now generating such headlines after his sacking and changing view. She is a local government officer and fully supported the initial approach of the government following their scientific advisers. What else could they do in the face of an unknown health emergency?
It seems strange to me that last year a lot of the people who are now criticising the government were saying they should follow the advice of experts.
The closure of our high street by the local Tory district council in order to aid social distancing has generated far more heated debate than any national story although if the town had statues of racists then that might be different.
Not sure I will be back on here for a while. PB used to provide a better level of insight than the news but the headers are Boris derangement syndrome personified - has Mike ever written a piece that highlighted good news for Boris?, and the comments which used to show a balance and at least some respect for those of the opposing view seem to have vanished. The only really significant story in the last few weeks for me was Cummings. If he had been spad to any party leader he did the wrong thing and shouldn’t have been supported. But government action in the face of an unprecedented global pandemic seems to have been as reasonable as could be expected. Not particularly well communicated or good but competent in the circumstances and despite individual decisions and policies not being right decisions seem to have been made with relevant scientific advice and to the best ability at the time.
You need to pay more attention. We started with the benefit of the Italian experience to learn from, and newly elected government with very strong support. We will end with one of the worst death rates in the world.
12 cans of Barnard Castle Eye Test Hazy Durham IPA arrived today. I'll probably drink one or two of them tonight and can let you all know what they're like.
Nicole Smallman and Bibaa Henry had been celebrating a birthday with friends in a London park the night they were stabbed to death. The sisters had stayed behind after everyone else had left just after midnight. Now, five days after their bodies were found, detectives have said they believe they were murdered by a stranger.
Still not sure why this isn't getting more attention in the press. It's especially worrying if this was a random attack.
Have any Leavers on this site suggested recently there should be an extension?
I think in March when nobody was talking a few said they'd consider it if appropriate (myself included) but following the talks recently between Frost and Barnier I think the pretty unanimous opinion here amongst Leavers has been that there should not be one.
My apologies to any Leavers that have been calling for one that I forgot you.
Yes, Leavers have self-radicalised. Again.
The heat with which I was denounced when pointing out the zealotry of the government was formidable. The silence with which they’ve slithered away from their own self-proclaimed moderation was typical.
I don't think that's fair.
I think the general response then (myself included) was that it was pointless to extend now and that if there was a reason to extend then that could be quietly addressed in June.
Fast forward to June and there's no reason to extend. So we're not doing so.
Had Frost and Barnier not been able to engage in their talks yet I'd have supported a short extension due to the virus. But that's not the case, they have been able to do so and its revealed there is no reason to extend.
It’s entirely fair. I was told over and over that this was going to be extended later and that I was quite wrong to take the government at its word. Many posters claimed I was “obsessed” about the subject.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
You were obsessed to bring it up in March.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
You’re gambling with my partner’s health,
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
I pity you.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
I would not wish harm on anyone. Should you get Covid-19, I would hope that you would have a speedy recovery.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I'm not indifferent. I hope your partner is healthy and gets their medication they need. I don't hate the EU, nor do I think we need to extend transition to ensure they do.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Fuck off. There are serious risks of disruption to medical supplies, previously acknowledged by the government, in the event of a disorderly break with the EU. But you deny this possibility because it gets in the way of your ability properly to hate the EU. You’re sickeningly cavalier in your indulgence of your prejudices. Fuck off.
There's risks to everything in life. The wise thing to do is appreciate what the risks are and work to mitigate them, not to hide in terror.
You really are acting like an agorophobiac. Afraid to step out of your cosy home because the big wide world is a scary place.
You have my sympathies.
You’re happy to take risks with my partner’s life. Fuck off and crawl back under the rock you came from, you odious toad.
There's risks to everyone's life every day.
You can be as nasty and as rude as you like, you just belittle yourself doing that. I'm not sinking to your level, I'm rising above it. I feel sorry for you that you're so blinded by hatred and fear you can't move on.
Please do not engage with me again ever. I do not wish to deal with callous scum like you.
Streaming services like Netflix taking down/editing/consulting on potentially racist comedy and tv shows is an interesting phenomenon. It's important to note that governments are *NOT* telling them to do this. This is private businesses deciding to do it for themselves. Very small state approach which presumably will be welcomed by conservatives
They're being bullied into it by a relatively tiny number of activists on social media.
Free speech in action. The other side of the debate can speak freely if they're unhappy too. The logical compromise is to do what Disney have done with Dumbo. They say at the end of the description before you press play: "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes." Then the film is 100% as originally recorded, unaltered. Job done.
As you know the silent majority will stay silent until election day. We will have our revenge on this mob you seem to have joined.
You think putting a phrase like "This film is as originally recorded. It may contain cultural stereotypes" is the action of a mob?
I think needing to board up the Cenotaph is the action of the mob. People vandalising the monuments to Gandhi and Churchill are actions of the mob. This new wave of censorship will be defeated and those who defeat it will be called every insult under the sun by the mob when we do. Your mob failed to get change by the ballot box in 2019 and now you're taking it to the streets. It's just wrong.
Gandhi must fall. Admittedly, I wonder if how much of this just people trolling
I've just watched the Major scene - it's fine in my opinion, but some people are sensitive to language.
You could make a perfectly fine Dambusters movie without anyone addressing the dog by name. You don’t even have to rename it or edit it out. Just have everyone referring to it as “good boy” or “your lab”.
Perhaps, but why should historical work be altered to fit with modern sensitivities? I think people should be able to choose to watch what they like, perhaps with a warning about content that some may find offensive.
I was taking about a remake but historical works are often so edited. Bits are taken out of Shakespeare for performance all the time. Movies are often edited for TV and/or airline viewing. It’s not new.
The name of the dog in Dambusters is not key to the narrative of the whole movie. That’s the difference. You can edit it out with no ill effects. You don’t even have to take the dog or its death out, just its name. The decision of Quantas in that case removed a key scene. The equivalent in Dambusters would be taking out the scene in the theatre when he came up with the idea of measuring height using lamps. Editors exist for a reason.
Whilst that's true, I'm uncomfortable with a blanket ban on words.
To go back to Fawlty Towers, the use of the n word is part of the joke (on the Major, I might add) so that scene wouldn't really work without it. But I guess that's not enough to save it.
I think Rising Damp is a good example of 'who is the butt of the joke?'. The answer is obviously Rigsby, whose racist assumptions are shown up as he is easily outwitted by Philip.
But that does not mean that Philip's own characterisation of himself as the son of an African chief is not in many ways problematic. You do have to watch the series to get that, not just five minutes of it.
While that is true, there is probably very little worthwhile art, literature, film, that is not "problematic" to a greater or lesser extent. Artists, writers, film-makers etc. all have their prejudices, and values change over time.
This is probably true if "problematic" means not fully in line with today's prevailing mores. However if challenged to come up with a list of great artistic works which feature crass racist stereotypes presented uncritically, I think it would be a short one. Or perhaps I should say I hope it would be, since I have never tried to do it.
I think there are a large number of good literary works that are indeed filled with crass racist stereotypes, presented more or less uncritically. Decline and Fall, the Forsyte Saga, Trollope's political novels, The Jew of Malta, Oliver Twist etc.
You can add the James Bond novels to that.
If you go looking for something to offend, you will find it. As no doubt others will about us in the future.
Merchant of Venice. These issues have always been with us.
I think the Bible has a lot to answer for......
The Bible is just like Gone With The Wind, a product of its time.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
LOL......
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
Why are we pretending to be wary about criticizing parts of the Quran?
I've never done so. I'm an equal opportunities critic of organised religion. I've never held back on criticising Islam, any more than I'll criticise Christianity, the Catholic Church etc
To do otherwise would make me a hypocrite. I've had one person here once call me an Islamophobe for doing so, and one person here call me an anti-Catholic bigot but by and large I think people are quite OK with consistency.
Its inconsistency fuelled by bigotry people aren't OK with.
The price of a Trump win has drifted to 2.45. His unity speech is now planned for 19 June, "Juneteenth", in Tulsa, Oklahoma. How the Democrats must have punched the air with joy when they heard that. Seriously, how can it go right? The greatest unity candidate the world has ever seen has already hugged and kissed the Union flag, so if he doesn't want to be biased he's got one more to go:
An even bigger concern is what happens between November and January, should he not win. That will be the moment of maximum danger.
I'm sure there will be unbelievable amounts of stealing but provided the margin is clear I think it'll be OK. The key is that with the exception of ICE, the agencies he's in charge of - particularly the military, which is quite never-Trumpy at the top and very diverse lower down - have shown they won't follow him if he tries to abuse his remaining power. There are a lot of *police* who would support him, but hardly any of them work for the federal government, and GOP states are going to be unwilling to stick their necks out for him if he's just lost them the election.
It is Trump's private rabble army which concerns me most. They could be called to arms in a heartbeat.
When one considers that the American left have never accepted the legitimacy of the the Trump presidency , why would they expect the right to accept the legitimacy of Bidens?
They set this trend in motion.
Trump lost by nearly 3 million votes in 2016. Only the fact of the crappy, antiquated Electoral Kindergarten gifted him the White House...
That's more than 60 police officers injured in your supposedly 'peaceful' protests!
Compared to that, you'll forgive me if I give little weight to the supposed threats of right-wing violence, for which we have only the word of the side that has already committed violence.
See that mass of earth flying overhead? That's the moral high ground racing away from you.
I can easily visualise your face over your computer screen trying desperately to defend the indefensible.
You'll forgive me if I take those statistics from the ...erm...National Police Chiefs’ Council (who say 60 officers were hurt "one way or another" - a peculiar phrasing) with a pinch of salt given the right wing disinformation campaign, of which you are a part, has invented threats of an "orgy" mass cultural destruction by BLM, and posted images of injured police officers from 2016 onwards, not related to the BLM protests, indeed being pro-Timmy Robinson protests, as being from the recent demonstrations - https://fullfact.org/online/blm-protest-london-pictures/
Doubtless you will give as much credence to the statistics promulgated by the NPCC via the Standard as you will the claims of police brutality made by Black Protest Legal Support through the same paper? Or is is a police chiefs advocacy group more trustworthy than a black advocacy group?
The truth is that the so-called "violence" of these protests, which are in fact more peaceful than many othe protests over the years, is invented by the right to detract from the ongoing public health catastrophe that evidence increasingly shows has been caused by the negligence of the government the right supports.
'I can easily visualise your face over your computer screen trying desperately to defend the indefensible.'
Funny, that's exactly how I picture you when you encounter someone who refuses to swallow your woke propaganda wholesale.
I'm afraid the revolution ain't gonna fly, comrade. And yes, I do trust the police more than a movement that has already committed violence and vandalism - call me old-fashioned like that!
If you frame this as the “don’t mention the war” episode but don’t quote the scene about “ni**ers” and “wogs” then it obviously seems absurd. If you call it the “ni**ers and wogs episode” it might make people think. https://t.co/EQAvEVBF0K
It would, but it wasn’t what the episode was about.
I think either carrying a heavy warning at the start, or editing that particular bit out, before reinstating it would be acceptable to most.
I don't see why there is an obligation for any broadcaster to make old shows that it no longer deems appropriate, accessible. Fans of Fawlty Towers, I guess I am kind of one, although not obsessive as I tend to be over shows I really like, have seen it countless times before, and can buy the DVD if they so wish. Until the last few years it was very unusual to be able to watch any episode, of any show, whenever you liked on tv, and if the broadcasters decide not to carry some that contain language that is even less palatable now than it was 40 years ago, so be it really, in my view.
If you frame this as the “don’t mention the war” episode but don’t quote the scene about “ni**ers” and “wogs” then it obviously seems absurd. If you call it the “ni**ers and wogs episode” it might make people think. https://t.co/EQAvEVBF0K
It would, but it wasn’t what the episode was about.
I think either carrying a heavy warning at the start, or editing that particular bit out, before reinstating it would be acceptable to most.
"I don't see why there is an obligation for any broadcaster to make old shows that it no longer deems appropriate, accessible. Fans of Fawlty Towers, I guess I am kind of one, although not obsessive as I tend to be over shows I really like, have seen it countless times before, and can buy the DVD if they so wish. Until the last few years it was very unusual to be able to watch any episode, of any show, whenever you liked on tv, and if the broadcasters decide not to carry some that contain language that is even less palatable now than it was 40 years ago, so be it really, in my view".
I tend to agree with you . A piece of art should stay as the artist intended. However, we have a lot more things to worry about at the moment.
Seems the EU have formally accepted this decision despite Scotts wall to wall campaign to stop brexit
And you were the guy that, once upon a time, was so adamant that we couldn’t afford to risk crashing out without a deal.
Time for the deal now.
No more bluffing this is real and I expect the EU to compromise under Merkel's presidency
Lol @ ‘no more bluffing’
Correct me if I am wrong, but you are the PB’er who spent months posting here about the evil and risks of Boris and a no deal exit, then ate your own words long enough to actually vote for Boris to be our PM, then after a few months tries to return to the position you held originally?
Where do I say I want no deal
The nonsense of going on forever locked in a stagnant negotiation has concluded and both sides know the end is in sight and it comes at just the time Merkel takes over the EU presidency
I have high hopes for a September October deal
But being a conservative you are by nature an optimist
Nicole Smallman and Bibaa Henry had been celebrating a birthday with friends in a London park the night they were stabbed to death. The sisters had stayed behind after everyone else had left just after midnight. Now, five days after their bodies were found, detectives have said they believe they were murdered by a stranger.
Still not sure why this isn't getting more attention in the press. It's especially worrying if this was a random attack.
Boris out and about in front of the cameras and not before time
Crossover by the weekend then?
I think it was possible, maybe still is, but I am not at all sure this last weeks events and boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill will play well for labour
Unless it turns out that his illness has caused him to be permanently disabled, Boris isn't going anywhere, despite the wishful thinking of his opponents. Yes, Covid and its after-effects are going to make the next couple of years a nightmare across the Western world, but that’s unavoidable whoever the leader is, and there’s plenty of opportunity to get back to a semblance of good times by 2024.
As for ephemeral polls, the current orgy of cultural vandalism has interrupted Labour’s rise as the public wakes up to what the fuck they may be voting into power, as yesterday’s Survation suggests...
One solitary statue of a mass murderer gets unlawfully taken down, the rightists of PB call it an “orgy of cultural vandalism” and imply the Labour Party is to blame. In the meantime, we will have around 60,000 excess deaths as a result of the Government’s muddled response, more than any comparable country on an aggregate or per capita basis, and the worst economic downturn in the industrialised world, but that’s “unavoidable whoever the leader is”. In the words of one commentator here “you couldn’t make it up”.
One solitary statue taken down by a violent mob explicitly celebrated by Labour MP Nadia Whittome:
Note her exact words about a future Labour Government:
'I celebrate these acts of resistance.'
'We need a movement that will tear down systemic racism and the slave owner statues that symbolise it. And we need to win a government that will always be on the side of this movement.'
The statue's vandals have published a hit list of dozens more across the country to destroy, and they've already defaced many more, including Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.
Meanwhile, Labour mayors and councils across the country are jumping at the opportunity to 'review' their local monuments, and in the case of Sadiq Khan, to just send in the JCBs as he did with Milligan.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves about the left's intentions.
And I’m afraid the numbers speak for themselves as to the number of people your party has negligently allowed to die these last three months. Are you on the side of living humans or statues? The impression you give is that you give more of a damn about chunks of metal celebrating mass murderers like Coulson and Milligan than the people of this country. But I am sure that is not the case.
I'm sure the eventual public inquiry will establish exactly what occurred in this unprecendented global pandemic and the extent to which deaths could or could not have been avoided. Of course, you have all the answers now, thanks to your handy time machine.
'Living humans or statues' isn't a mutually-exclusive choice, by the way. One can want to save as many lives as possible from the pandemic, as the Government is doing, while deploring the violence and cultural vandalism of the far left. People have noticed what they're about, and it doesn't look as though they like it...
You base your entire paranoid polemic on one tweet from one Labour MP and a single Survation Poll that still shows your party’s support far more than halved in a month. As for “time machine” - you forget I borrowed yours, you know the one you use to predict elections? In the meantime the below tweets represent the actual views of the Labour Party - and most people in this country
David Lammy has - to my amazement - won my respect on this occasion. He explicitly said that he doesn't condone violence and riots AND that he would not march with BLM because that would make him a hypocrite after criticizing Cummings.
As for Starmer, on the other hand, actions speak louder than words. Two days after the illegal actions of that mob, he and dozens of Labour MPs put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the protesters.
If they didn't mean to lend their implicit support to illegal acts of violence then literally kneeling before a movement that had perpetrated them very publicly a couple of days earlier was a funny way of showing it...
They were kneeling in support of a movement protesting the racist torture murder of a black civilian by the police of our closest ally. That is what the protests are about, not some imagined “cultural vandalism”, which is a straw man minor by product emphasised by people such as yourself to divert attention from the real issues that need highlighting. But of course you place an equivalence on preserving the memory of the dead enslavers of Black people rather than the actual lives of their living descendants.
There is literally no comparison between the US and UK on this score, so importing the context of their racial conflicts to this country makes absolutely no sense. Here are the figures to prove it:
Since 1870, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.
In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. That's 5x as many deaths caused by police in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK!
Funny how the USA is suddenly our 'closest ally' for lefties when they want to import their cultural conflicts, but they want absolutely nothing to do with them at any other time...
"Taking the knee" is an alternative to violent protest. The fact that Colin Kaepernick tried it and lost his career means that some people have gone further because, clearly, it didn't work. The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage.
You can peacefully protest what happens on Mars for all I care. It's when the protesters turn violent, assault the police, and commit criminal damage that it becomes illicit - as is now clearly the case.
'between 1990 and 2014 380 deaths in police custody in England and Wales (or as a result of contact with the police were reported), 69 were from BME communities – 18%'
Otherwise known as fewer than 3 individuals per year in the latter group. There should be obviously be as few deaths in police custody as possible, but those figures are no reason for nationwide unrest.
'The actions of Starmer et al are, if anything, an attempt to encourage people to undertake less violent forms of protest by going back to an earlier stage'
That's some heroic spin indeed. Tell me, if a mob of Brexiteers had destroyed an EU monument - and put out a list of dozens more targets they intended to destroy - and then Boris and dozens of Conservative MPs had put out photos of themselves kneeling in support of the Brexiteers, would your interpretation be as generous?
Somehow I think not.
Deaths at police hands are unusual in this country, and deaths at police hands where the police officers concerned have committed a crime are very unusual. The officer who killed Azelle Rodney was prosecuted for murder and acquitted. Having read about the case, I don't think the officer gunned the man down just because he was black.
I wonder in ths same period how many black people under 25 have been killed by black people under 25. I am still struggling with the concept of the BLM movement when they never mention black people killing black people. The murders at the weekend were just ignored.
You "struggle with the concept" of an anti-racism movement that concentrates on highlighting racism?
I struggle with the concept of an organisation called Black Lives Matter than isn't really about black lives mattering.
If it was about black lives mattering would actually be asking the police to come down far more heavily on the black people cutting a swathe through black communities of America in a well documented explosion of violence and murder that far outweighs anything anybody in the white community could do,
Instead black lives matter is facilitating the acceleration of that explosion by what we see in Mineapolis and Seattle. Chicago too. The protests coincided with a bloodbath of black on black murders there last week end.
Perhaps if the police behaved more appropriately in the black communities then they would be trusted on gang crime rather more. From what I see, black communities are very concerned over gang and drug crime, but past experience inhibits their attitude to policing, particularly aggressive militarised policing.
I sense the police and the black community would both be in a better place if the gangs were not fabulously enriched by the thriving illegal drugs trade.
Instead of defunding the police why not defund the gangs by legalisating more banned substances.
Seems the EU have formally accepted this decision despite Scotts wall to wall campaign to stop brexit
And you were the guy that, once upon a time, was so adamant that we couldn’t afford to risk crashing out without a deal.
Time for the deal now.
No more bluffing this is real and I expect the EU to compromise under Merkel's presidency
Lol @ ‘no more bluffing’
Correct me if I am wrong, but you are the PB’er who spent months posting here about the evil and risks of Boris and a no deal exit, then ate your own words long enough to actually vote for Boris to be our PM, then after a few months tries to return to the position you held originally?
Where do I say I want no deal
The nonsense of going on forever locked in a stagnant negotiation has concluded and both sides know the end is in sight and it comes at just the time Merkel takes over the EU presidency
I have high hopes for a September October deal
But being a conservative you are by nature an optimist
There is equivocation here over the meaning of "no deal". No Deal, remember, was us leaving the EU with no transition period. In the end a deal was found and we avoided a no deal exit and went into a transition period.
Then, the No Deal definition was changed to mean No Trade Deal. These are not the same things.
Comments
I expect an "interim deal" by the year-end which keeps things closely aligned into 2021, with suitable wording about "selective divergence" being on the table for future negotiation.
An extension without an extension in other words.
If we extend then we'll be liable for a share in the EU budget next year, and if the EU chooses to demand that we pay a share in the pandemic costs we would be over a barrel and unable to say no without refusing the extension.
And now we see the government playing ducks and drakes with life and limb and an already-hammered economy, cheered on by self-proclaimed moderates who seem blithely to ignore the rank incompetence the government has shown dealing with the most recent major project.
Things will only get worse, and they won’t start getting better until Leavers plumb the depths of their foaming hatred of the EU.
If it involves no money, no free movement, the ability to diverge while keeping trade free then that would be an incredible deal don't you think? Better than membership surely?
(Though I think Carlotta's apparent scheme to wrap the Bruce in tin foil a bit farfetched.)
If he wins the vote on the day, and retains the support of his VP and GOP Senators, then there is no constitutional means to remove him from office. He would have the Supreme Court, Attorney General and military on his side as the victor of the election.
If he loses the vote then he's done. The military won't stand behind him. The Supreme Court won't overturn the election. He has to win - which means unleashing violence to stop Democrats voting.
I don't think you were told over and over that it would be extended, my apologies if so I'm not sure who said it, what I recall reading (and what I wrote) was that this would depend upon the situation in June. We're now in June.
There is no good reason to extend.
I mean this sincerely and from the depths of my heart: fuck you.
https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/hpg/uwandhc/offences/
The most recent notorious case I recall was that pub in Maida Vale.
https://historicengland.org.uk/whats-new/news/carlton-tavern-maida-vale-london-demolished/
Tend to agree on the need for a pragmatic solution; however it is important that the process not be destroyed.
https://www.ft.com/content/37fad070-160f-4d3b-b043-940b843a0daf
The Tariff schedule the UK arranged an intern to produce has gone in the bin and it has now taken the sovereign decision to be a rule-taker of tarrifs when exporting its goods and won't be charging any on incoming goods.
I expect the EU to time out the talks to ensure that this is the arrangment going forwards.
It can't be nice carrying such hatred, rage and anger in your heart.
You have my sympathies.
Just less ... pointed.
Not sure what their Welsh policy is.
Yet you are indifferent to the health of my partner so that you can indulge your irrational hatred of the EU. Seriously, fuck you.
I can't think of another reason Johnson isn't going for an extension.
If this were, say, a Brexiteer protest being cancelled because of threatened violence you would be blaming the "lefties" stifling their "free speech". When it comes to a left wing protest being cancelled because your fellow travellers have threatened to come and knock some heads together, its the fault of the party cancelling. Free speech is only for the right.
Something to be treated as an historical story, from the context of its historical creators.
You're acting like an irrational agoraphobiac and you have my sympathies. I've been out into the world, in and out of the EU. Its not scary.
Why would the German carmakers and Italian prosecco growers ride to our rescue if they had no tarrifs already?
I guess like most people who aren't somehow white supremacists, if I was in charge of punishing people I would certainly give a more severe punishment to people throwing bleach on a statue of a black poet, than to people pulling down the statue of a slave trader.
A bit like the Q.......n?????
I never said that. What's a Fatwa.....???
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/police-chiefs-act-black-lives-matter-protests-violence-a4466821.html
That's more than 60 police officers injured in your supposedly 'peaceful' protests!
Compared to that, you'll forgive me if I give little weight to the supposed threats of right-wing violence, for which we have only the word of the side that has already committed violence.
See that mass of earth flying overhead? That's the moral high ground racing away from you.
"This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental."
Doing it now demonstrates that the UK won't even try and bluff an already critically weak hand.
I understand the fantasy parts of Brexit and even the incompetent parts but this is actively self-destructive.
https://f7td5.app.goo.gl/7UUegP
Sent via @upday
Seems the EU have formally accepted this decision despite Scotts wall to wall campaign to stop brexit
You really are acting like an agorophobiac. Afraid to step out of your cosy home because the big wide world is a scary place.
You have my sympathies.
The more they shout about it the more likely they are to turn about in my experience.
"The proposed ban on incitement to “religious hatred” makes no sense unless it involves a ban on the Koran itself; and that would be pretty absurd, when you consider that the Bill's intention is to fight Islamophobia."
- Boris, in The Daily Telegraph 21 July 2005.
Both the general law and its Gresham’s corollary point, in contemporary circumstances, towards the resort to physical violence, in the form of firearms or high explosive, as being so probable as to be predicted with virtual certainty. The experience of the last decade and more, all round the world, shows that acts of violence, however apparently irrational or inappropriate their targets, precipitate a frenzied search on the part of the society attacked to discover and remedy more and more grievances, real or imaginary, among those from the violence is supposed to emanate or on whose behalf it is supposed to be exercised"
You're heading to the supermarket because you need to, the restaurant because you want to. An important distinction.
If it was about black lives mattering would actually be asking the police to come down far more heavily on the black people cutting a swathe through black communities of America in a well documented explosion of violence and murder that far outweighs anything anybody in the white community could do,
Instead black lives matter is facilitating the acceleration of that explosion by what we see in Mineapolis and Seattle. Chicago too. The protests coincided with a bloodbath of black on black murders there last week end.
Reading the racist abuse directed at Othello, for example, "an old black ram is tupping your white ewe", "the thicklips", I think that author did expect the audience to feel disgust at Iago.
It's grimly funny to read old commentaries that went to great lengths to try to deny that Othello was in fact, black.
Transisition is over on 31st December 2020 no matter the consequences
You can be as nasty and as rude as you like, you just belittle yourself doing that. I'm not sinking to your level, I'm rising above it. I feel sorry for you that you're so blinded by hatred and fear you can't move on.
Better or worse than membership? Worse, I would predict. There will be money involved to keep frictionless trade and we will be rule-takers. OTOH, no FM. At least not in theory.
I think you're going to hate it but we will see.
No more bluffing this is real and I expect the EU to compromise under Merkel's presidency
Lots of things aren’t obvious targets. But these people don’t discriminate.
You’d do well at least ask yourself first why this movement might be getting out of control before exercising supreme cognitive dissonance because them targeting icons you treasure doesn’t fit.
You'll forgive me if I take those statistics from the ...erm...National Police Chiefs’ Council (who say 60 officers were hurt "one way or another" - a peculiar phrasing) with a pinch of salt given the right wing disinformation campaign, of which you are a part, has invented threats of an "orgy" mass cultural destruction by BLM, and posted images of injured police officers from 2016 onwards, not related to the BLM protests, indeed being pro-Timmy Robinson protests, as being from the recent demonstrations - https://fullfact.org/online/blm-protest-london-pictures/
Doubtless you will give as much credence to the statistics promulgated by the NPCC via the Standard as you will the claims of police brutality made by Black Protest Legal Support through the same paper? Or is is a police chiefs advocacy group more trustworthy than a black advocacy group?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/black-lives-matter-lawyers-concern-police-treatment-protesters-a4465621.html
The truth is that the so-called "violence" of these protests, which are in fact more peaceful than many othe protests over the years, is invented by the right to detract from the ongoing public health catastrophe that evidence increasingly shows has been caused by the negligence of the government the right supports.
I think either carrying a heavy warning at the start, or editing that particular bit out, before reinstating it would be acceptable to most.
I live in a small town near Bristol, and the arguments I see on here are nothing like those being had by the vast majority of my contacts. There was a squabble as to whether Colston statue was removed properly, some of the more left wing agreeing a mob should do it others agreeing that it should already have been taken down by Labour controlled Bristol City Council, who decided that a plaque would do, which was then cancelled by the Black mayor.
The only things I hear about continued protests are that the people protesting are idiots and don’t they respect the NHS workers?
I am also a scout leader and can report that the Facebook group I am part of related to that had to take all the posts down about statues as they didn’t want to set of a Facebook algorithm and get taken down!
Support for the government tends to follow party lines but the excess death reports seem only to percolate from very left wing freinds in Bristol. My wife who hates Boris cannot understand why a scientist who was part of the recommnedation to not lock down initially is now generating such headlines after his sacking and changing view. She is a local government officer and fully supported the initial approach of the government following their scientific advisers. What else could they do in the face of an unknown health emergency?
It seems strange to me that last year a lot of the people who are now criticising the government were saying they should follow the advice of experts.
The closure of our high street by the local Tory district council in order to aid social distancing has generated far more heated debate than any national story although if the town had statues of racists then that might be different.
Not sure I will be back on here for a while. PB used to provide a better level of insight than the news but the headers are Boris derangement syndrome personified - has Mike ever written a piece that highlighted good news for Boris?, and the comments which used to show a balance and at least some respect for those of the opposing view seem to have vanished. The only really significant story in the last few weeks for me was Cummings. If he had been spad to any party leader he did the wrong thing and shouldn’t have been supported. But government action in the face of an unprecedented global pandemic seems to have been as reasonable as could be expected. Not particularly well communicated or good but competent in the circumstances and despite individual decisions and policies not being right decisions seem to have been made with relevant scientific advice and to the best ability at the time.
For the EU.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you are the PB’er who spent months posting here about the evil and risks of Boris and a no deal exit, then ate your own words long enough to actually vote for Boris to be our PM, then after a few months tries to return to the position you held originally?
The warning doesn't even need to be that heavy. The one Disney did with Dumbo was quite tasteful, blink and you'd miss it. That's the solution for dated products IMHO not canning them entirely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr2932NMCqk
Nicole Smallman and Bibaa Henry had been celebrating a birthday with friends in a London park the night they were stabbed to death. The sisters had stayed behind after everyone else had left just after midnight. Now, five days after their bodies were found, detectives have said they believe they were murdered by a stranger.
Still not sure why this isn't getting more attention in the press. It's especially worrying if this was a random attack.
To do otherwise would make me a hypocrite. I've had one person here once call me an Islamophobe for doing so, and one person here call me an anti-Catholic bigot but by and large I think people are quite OK with consistency.
Its inconsistency fuelled by bigotry people aren't OK with.
Back to his bunker for another week, job done !
Funny, that's exactly how I picture you when you encounter someone who refuses to swallow your woke propaganda wholesale.
I'm afraid the revolution ain't gonna fly, comrade. And yes, I do trust the police more than a movement that has already committed violence and vandalism - call me old-fashioned like that!
I tend to agree with you . A piece of art should stay as the artist intended. However, we have a lot more things to worry about at the moment.
The nonsense of going on forever locked in a stagnant negotiation has concluded and both sides know the end is in sight and it comes at just the time Merkel takes over the EU presidency
I have high hopes for a September October deal
But being a conservative you are by nature an optimist
Worst economic numbers in history
What is BoZo's priority today?
A fucking statue
Like his hero...
https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1271421033426403328
BoZo wants a "beautiful picture" before he hides again
Instead of defunding the police why not defund the gangs by legalisating more banned substances.
Then, the No Deal definition was changed to mean No Trade Deal. These are not the same things.