Videos from around March 12th by Halpern, Vallance and Harries looked to have aged appallingly. The most deadly groupthink in years.
No one seems to have asked them the most basic questions, such as:
1) what are the points of greatest uncertainty in your analysis? 2) what if you're wrong about any/all of those? 3) why do you think everyone else is following a different approach?
This was a brand new disease, poorly understood (it still is) and they seem to have proceeded with blithe certainty about everything.
almost as if putting science correspondents on the daily briefings may have actually been a wiser move.
This was a job for the politicians to undertake. They didn't.
And of course, Boris Johnson didn't even turn up for the meetings to quiz them.
Except of course if its true as we discussed yesterday that if the SAGE scientists wanted to continue to continue down the Swedish route at least a week more and if its true that questioning from Cummings saw them change to lockdown, then Cumming and the governments questioning probably saved 50,000 lives from being lost. We'd probably be at over a hundred thousand dead now otherwise.
I have no interest in ever engaging with you. Please desist.
No thanks.
Its a public forum. If you have no interest in having your views challenged then you can either ignore viewpoints that differ to yours, or talk to a mirror.
When you're ready to apologise for swearing earlier you can. I'm being the bigger person despite your swearing at me.
I have no interest in engaging with a simpering cretin who is callous to the risks of pain and suffering that his prejudice leads to. So, and in full awareness of Mike's warning earlier, fuck off.
If I am banned as a consequence, so be it. I won't be a moral vacuum, which is what you evidently are.
Off Topic
There seems to have been something resembling bullying by some posters in response, especially to Alistair's views on Brexit. Unparliamentary language aside I for one can understand Alistair's frustration.
My late father was a North Midlands RFU referee decades ago. His view after a player had thrown a punch was what provoked the punch in the first place.
If people are to be shown red cards for their reaction, perhaps a review of what provoked that reaction could be looked at too.
I have made comments, which I would normally avoid making, but some of the commentary by posters who would claim to be supportive of certain actions, are perhaps sometimes written to antagonise those with a more liberal viewpoint. Sometimes they do touch a nerve.
Some posts regarding George Floyd, slavery and Black Lives Matter have been dreadful over the last week or so.
PB is a wonderful resource. Many posters from all political persuasions can inspire and impress. It is not so inspirational or impressive when it is used by some posters as an alternative to ConHome or Labourlist.
A transparent attempt to win the war by lofty generalisation after a week of bruising defeat in each and every individual battle. Nobody has claimed that black lives matter more or less than other lives, not by so much as .001%. They certainly matter more to the average PBer than to that appalling POS George Floyd, because I don't suppose any of us have ever pointed a loaded weapon at a black woman (unless you have something to share?) It's not as if anyone is advocating a change of government policy to a "black lives matter about 30% as much as other sorts" approach, or that we should be complacent about an epidemic of killings of black people by white policemen that disfigures UK society.
And I don't think anyone - and I mean anyone - disputes the incomprehensible evil of the European Atlantic slave trade. You may have misunderstood some crucial parts of the argument.
tldr: why don'y you move to Minnesota?
Not really.
I have no particular axe to grind as regards racism. I do believe how American policemen sometimes behave is wrong. George Floyd probably wouldn't be my poster boy. I think the Sandra Bland case is far sadder.
As you have implied I am not particularly bright so I have clearly misunderstood the cut and thrust of the arguments. My mistake.
Ooh, passive aggression.
Point us to one of these "dreadful posts" about slavery and perhaps we can explain where you are going wrong.
You don't know me, I don't know you. Why are you trying to pick a fight with me?
Because he is a troll that does it to everyone lol. He doesn't really have any formed opinions on anything, he is just competing with @Philip Thompson and @contrarian for the title of Pain in the Arse Contrarian of the Year 2020
Whereas you're just an obsessed troll.
I answered your questions yesterday on what I believed in and how that was different to Trump and you went deadly silent once again. Do you have any ways in which you think I'm the same as Trump - or are you just so blinded by Brexit you can't see a difference between libertarian values and Trump?
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it? He drove the hideous business.
That seems very different to someone who bought and sold and owned slaves, which - however horrific - was extremely common before Britain heroically abolished it because we are great; all the early US presidents, and Founding Fathers, owned slaves, probably the vast majority of kings and queens in history owned slaves, all the Roman emperors, bigwigs, all the Greek philosophers, leading thinkers in ISIS, the Prophet Muhammad, and so on.
If "slave owning" is enough to get your statue pulled down, then there will have to be an orgy of toppling
All the early US presidents didn't own slaves - John Adams, who succeeded George Washington as second president, did not. Not did all the founding fathers (eg Alexander Hamilton) and even Benjamin Franklin, who had owned slaves, became an abolitionist. It was a widespread practice but it was also widely opposed at the time including through the brave resistance of slaves and former slaves.
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it?
No.
Slave trading was "part" of his business (as were many merchants of the day) - how much is not known, but since he traded in lots of other areas as well, its extremely unlikely it was "all":
He was a king who lived a long time ago. So must be a racist I guess.
He was admittedly hard on the English invaders and IIRC his brother invaded Ireland (like rather a lot of kings of Scotland and England). But the relevance to BLM is uncertain. I don't think he ever went on Crusade either (though I am sure he would have liked to go, like rather a lot of kings ditto ditto). His heart did reputedly go separately, but that was postmortem (and may be a myth anyway as it has purportedly been found at Melrose Abbey).
His heart was taken by 3 knights, 2 of which were family retainers of the L persuasion. They were supposed to be taking it to Jerusalem and got as far as Spain (sense of direction not being a family strong point) before coming back.
Videos from around March 12th by Halpern, Vallance and Harries looked to have aged appallingly. The most deadly groupthink in years.
No one seems to have asked them the most basic questions, such as:
1) what are the points of greatest uncertainty in your analysis? 2) what if you're wrong about any/all of those? 3) why do you think everyone else is following a different approach?
This was a brand new disease, poorly understood (it still is) and they seem to have proceeded with blithe certainty about everything.
almost as if putting science correspondents on the daily briefings may have actually been a wiser move.
This was a job for the politicians to undertake. They didn't.
And of course, Boris Johnson didn't even turn up for the meetings to quiz them.
Except of course if its true as we discussed yesterday that if the SAGE scientists wanted to continue to continue down the Swedish route at least a week more and if its true that questioning from Cummings saw them change to lockdown, then Cumming and the governments questioning probably saved 50,000 lives from being lost. We'd probably be at over a hundred thousand dead now otherwise.
I have no interest in ever engaging with you. Please desist.
No thanks.
Its a public forum. If you have no interest in having your views challenged then you can either ignore viewpoints that differ to yours, or talk to a mirror.
When you're ready to apologise for swearing earlier you can. I'm being the bigger person despite your swearing at me.
I have no interest in engaging with a simpering cretin who is callous to the risks of pain and suffering that his prejudice leads to. So, and in full awareness of Mike's warning earlier, fuck off.
If I am banned as a consequence, so be it. I won't be a moral vacuum, which is what you evidently are.
Off Topic
There seems to have been something resembling bullying by some posters in response, especially to Alistair's views on Brexit. Unparliamentary language aside I for one can understand Alistair's frustration.
My late father was a North Midlands RFU referee decades ago. His view after a player had thrown a punch was what provoked the punch in the first place.
If people are to be shown red cards for their reaction, perhaps a review of what provoked that reaction could be looked at too.
I have made comments, which I would normally avoid making, but some of the commentary by posters who would claim to be supportive of certain actions, are perhaps sometimes written to antagonise those with a more liberal viewpoint. Sometimes they do touch a nerve.
Some posts regarding George Floyd, slavery and Black Lives Matter have been dreadful over the last week or so.
PB is a wonderful resource. Many posters from all political persuasions can inspire and impress. It is not so inspirational or impressive when it is used by some posters as an alternative to ConHome or Labourlist.
A transparent attempt to win the war by lofty generalisation after a week of bruising defeat in each and every individual battle. Nobody has claimed that black lives matter more or less than other lives, not by so much as .001%. They certainly matter more to the average PBer than to that appalling POS George Floyd, because I don't suppose any of us have ever pointed a loaded weapon at a black woman (unless you have something to share?) It's not as if anyone is advocating a change of government policy to a "black lives matter about 30% as much as other sorts" approach, or that we should be complacent about an epidemic of killings of black people by white policemen that disfigures UK society.
And I don't think anyone - and I mean anyone - disputes the incomprehensible evil of the European Atlantic slave trade. You may have misunderstood some crucial parts of the argument.
tldr: why don'y you move to Minnesota?
Not really.
I have no particular axe to grind as regards racism. I do believe how American policemen sometimes behave is wrong. George Floyd probably wouldn't be my poster boy. I think the Sandra Bland case is far sadder.
As you have implied I am not particularly bright so I have clearly misunderstood the cut and thrust of the arguments. My mistake.
Ooh, passive aggression.
Point us to one of these "dreadful posts" about slavery and perhaps we can explain where you are going wrong.
You don't know me, I don't know you. Why are you trying to pick a fight with me?
Because he is a troll that does it to everyone lol. He doesn't really have any formed opinions on anything, he is just competing with @Philip Thompson and @contrarian for the title of Pain in the Arse Contrarian of the Year 2020
The arsehole of arseholes calling someone a troll, you could not make it up.
Only an arsehole to you old chap (well maybe Philip Thompson also perhaps). You should feel flattered. My rudeness to you reflects your yobbish rudeness to everyone else. You clearly live in such an insulated echo-chamber (as is so beloved of nationalists of all stripes) that you don't understand what a troll is. How is the anger management going?
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
He was a king who lived a long time ago. So must be a racist I guess.
He won the battle of Bannockburn thereby confirming Scotland an independent kingdom
And this was in 1314 and he then took Berwick in 1318
I have no idea why he is described as a racist
That is unionists for you G, nasty pieces of work.
Robert Bruce was a hard bastard, but you had to be, if you wanted to survive, in that time and place.
And, in my view, there was a lot to admire about the man. He was a brilliant general, who fought hard to defend his country. I've no idea why anyone would wish to deface his statue.
You do wonder how much longer these daily conferences are to continue for
Maybe twice a week is all that is needed, they have become largely tedious
Glad you said that. I think I agree but was wary to say it - not sure why but I was.
Why would you be wary to say that. You are not normally reticent
It just feels a bit "off". Like the government is making this special effort to talk to us every day for an hour at 5 pm and we're not being grateful if we don't at least pretend we're still interested.
People have been tetchy since 2016 or thereabouts.
No, 2014. The first Indyref
When historians come to chart the Total Decline of the West, it will begin with the Scots narrowly saying Nay
Today we have the Scottish unionist fascists defacing national monuments and trying to blame it on BLM, what a bunch of sleazy no good cowards
A nationalist calls unionists fascists! haha. Once again you should look up the allegiances of the SNP during the 1930s. You really don't know much about history do you Mr. Angry?
However, no one will do the governments calling due to Cummings according to many on here
Maybe Cummings wasn't the be all and end all, or the "biggest news story of the 21st century" afterall?
I have been thinking about Cummings and I would compare his story to a very funny joke
Everyone is in stitches on the first telling, and maybe a couple more, but as time goes on it becomes less funny and even boring and replaced by another very funny joke
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it?
No.
Slave trading was "part" of his business (as were many merchants of the day) - how much is not known, but since he traded in lots of other areas as well, its extremely unlikely it was "all":
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
However, no one will do the governments calling due to Cummings according to many on here
Maybe Cummings wasn't the be all and end all, or the "biggest news story of the 21st century" afterall?
Nope, Boris Johnson has plenty more mismanagement to come that will easily eclipse that one. ..and on that note, it is time to bid you all good night, as it is Friday and it is almost beer o'clock, so I wont have time to read Malcolmg's inarticulate rant at my previous post, which is a shame, because I do find him very amusing.
You do wonder how much longer these daily conferences are to continue for
Maybe twice a week is all that is needed, they have become largely tedious
Glad you said that. I think I agree but was wary to say it - not sure why but I was.
Why would you be wary to say that. You are not normally reticent
It just feels a bit "off". Like the government is making this special effort to talk to us every day for an hour at 5 pm and we're not being grateful if we don't at least pretend we're still interested.
Perhaps I'm too sensitive sometimes.
That is quite sweet if I may say without sounding patronising
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
Shapps: No update on travel corridors until 29 June.
One does wonder why Walsh/IAG aren't suing Ireland or Spain over identical travel restrictions to the UK ....or slashing the work force at Aer Lingus / Iberia.
They are already paying the staff half of what BA get , I would bet.
1) local neds* having a laugh, zero political content 2) Someone with a seriously confused understanding of histdory 3) first order false flag by rightw-ingers 4) Second order ditto by some other persuasion
* Anglice: chavs.
Ergo - wait and see who gets the Polis Scotland free ride in a patrol car.
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
You do wonder how much longer these daily conferences are to continue for
Maybe twice a week is all that is needed, they have become largely tedious
Glad you said that. I think I agree but was wary to say it - not sure why but I was.
Why would you be wary to say that. You are not normally reticent
It just feels a bit "off". Like the government is making this special effort to talk to us every day for an hour at 5 pm and we're not being grateful if we don't at least pretend we're still interested.
Perhaps I'm too sensitive sometimes.
That is quite sweet if I may say without sounding patronising
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Do you approve of this tactic, disapprove, or have only a detached appreciation for the competence of the execution?
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it?
No.
Slave trading was "part" of his business (as were many merchants of the day) - how much is not known, but since he traded in lots of other areas as well, its extremely unlikely it was "all":
He died without children - because he never married. What's the oldest reason in the world for men not marrying?
Business was a much smaller and less specialised world in those days and I doubt it was possible to be a big ass Bristol merchant without having substantial slaving interests. Colston wasn't a lone actor, he was on the board of a slaving company founded by the future James II. Ironically Colston is in the limelight because he was less of a shit than 99% of slave traders and devoted his profits to philanthropy rather than banking them.
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
Yet why do the Scottish Greens support indy? As did the Scottish Socialists of yore? And quite a few woke-y types have gone into the SNP. I really think you need to reconsider that statement.
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
Yet why do the Scottish Greens support indy? As did the Scottish Socialists of yore? And quite a few woke-y types have gone into the SNP. I really think you need to reconsider that statement.
The non-Labour Left is generally supportive of Scottish Independence on the basis of breaking up the "racist imperialist British state", or just generally being anti-English Tories, so I'm a bit unusual in that respect.
People have been tetchy since 2016 or thereabouts.
No, 2014. The first Indyref
When historians come to chart the Total Decline of the West, it will begin with the Scots narrowly saying Nay
Today we have the Scottish unionist fascists defacing national monuments and trying to blame it on BLM, what a bunch of sleazy no good cowards
A nationalist calls unionists fascists! haha. Once again you should look up the allegiances of the SNP during the 1930s. You really don't know much about history do you Mr. Angry?
Back under your rock cockroach , nobody interested in your puerile crap.
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it?
No.
Slave trading was "part" of his business (as were many merchants of the day) - how much is not known, but since he traded in lots of other areas as well, its extremely unlikely it was "all":
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
However, no one will do the governments calling due to Cummings according to many on here
Maybe Cummings wasn't the be all and end all, or the "biggest news story of the 21st century" afterall?
Nope, Boris Johnson has plenty more mismanagement to come that will easily eclipse that one. ..and on that note, it is time to bid you all good night, as it is Friday and it is almost beer o'clock, so I wont have time to read Malcolmg's inarticulate rant at my previous post, which is a shame, because I do find him very amusing.
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
'white Scottish nationalism'? What's all that about then?
NHS good news, my Dads cancer biopsy, planned for March 29th, has been rearranged for July 2nd. The bad news is, having been allowed out for the first time in 3 months, he has to self isolate for the 14 days prior to the event
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
Yet why do the Scottish Greens support indy? As did the Scottish Socialists of yore? And quite a few woke-y types have gone into the SNP. I really think you need to reconsider that statement.
The non-Labour Left is generally supportive of Scottish Independence on the basis of breaking up the "racist imperialist British state", or just generally being anti-English Tories, so I'm a bit unusual in that respect.
Exactly, the Scottish hard left supports independence to make Scotland a far left, woke state. They have zero time for Wallace and Bruce and Scottish nationalism.
Hence the divisions now coming to the fore on transgender rights etc between the woke Scottish Yes backers and the more traditional Scottish nationalists, the latter particularly loyal to Salmond
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Good God, just logged on to find @eadric is trying to argue that it's ok to own slaves so long as you don't trade in them!
Temporarily boarding up the Cenotaph and Churchill monument is a sensible move from Khan to prevent an expensive repair bill. I personally abhore any criminal damage of property. I am not sure how criminal damage reflects on the Labour Party, particularly as most sensible key Labour politicians, having condemned racism have also condemned the way the Colston statue, for example, was removed.
That could just be the tipping point for The Democratic Football Lads Alliance.
Tice is playing with fire.
Er, I think it's the protestors who've been playing with fire as they are the ones attacking the Churchill statue, defacing it, and trying to get murals of Churchill pulled down.
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
'white Scottish nationalism'? What's all that about then?
Up to his usual expert analysis on Scottish matters
If Sunday trading hours go, they'll never come back.
Change is happening and so much more will as a direct result of covid
Who wants it though?
Crap for workers, and an unnecessary cost for businesses who'll have to stay open to compete even though Sunday trade is already very slow. People aren't going to buy more stuff - just spread it out.
If Sunday trading hours go, they'll never come back.
Change is happening and so much more will as a direct result of covid
Who wants it though?
Crap for workers, and an unnecessary cost for businesses who'll have to stay open to compete even though Sunday trade is already very slow. People aren't going to buy more stuff - just spread it out.
Much the same was said when shops were allowed to open on sundays in the first place
I’m confused. Isn’t Hitchens all insistent on freedom? So why is he railing against the freedom to shop on whatever day you like and the freedom to sell things on whatever day you like?
It almost seems as though he believes that people should only be “free” to live the way he approves and to do things of which he approves. And, in fact, those should be compulsory, and if they’re not, it’s an attack on freedom.
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
I take Owen Jones as the steer for what my "woke left" side should think and that is to be pretty sympathetic to indy. Yet at the same anti Brexit and any sort of BNP or UKIP type nationalism.
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
Yet why do the Scottish Greens support indy? As did the Scottish Socialists of yore? And quite a few woke-y types have gone into the SNP. I really think you need to reconsider that statement.
The non-Labour Left is generally supportive of Scottish Independence on the basis of breaking up the "racist imperialist British state", or just generally being anti-English Tories, so I'm a bit unusual in that respect.
Exactly, the Scottish hard left supports independence to make Scotland a far left, woke state. They have zero time for Wallace and Bruce and Scottish nationalism.
Hence the divisions now coming to the fore on transgender rights etc between the woke Scottish Yes backers and the more traditional Scottish nationalists, the latter particularly loyal to Salmond
Things and people that HYUFD has clung to as destroyers of Scottish Indy, a timeline.
David Cameron Better Together Indy Scotland being chucked out of the EU Ruth Davidson reviving SCon fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Corbyn reviving SLab's fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Theresa May Boris Johnson reviving SCon fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Jo Swinson running for Holytood and leading Unionist fightback Alex Salmond being found guilty thus discrediting the Indy cause Alex Salmond cleared starting SNP civil war Starmer reviving SLab's fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Divisions between woke Scottish Yes backers and traditional Scottish nationalists
I'm sure I've missed a few, please feel free anyone who wants to add to this impressive list.
I’m confused. Isn’t Hitchens all insistent on freedom? So why is he railing against the freedom to shop on whatever day you like and the freedom to sell things on whatever day you like?
It almost seems as though he believes that people should only be “free” to live the way he approves and to do things of which he approves. And, in fact, those should be compulsory, and if they’re not, it’s an attack on freedom.
No, HItchens is a social conservative, not a libertarian, even though he opposes lockdown
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
Bingo
Yes but the ironic thing is for the woke left, white Scottish nationalism is as bad as Brexit and British nationalism
Yet why do the Scottish Greens support indy? As did the Scottish Socialists of yore? And quite a few woke-y types have gone into the SNP. I really think you need to reconsider that statement.
The non-Labour Left is generally supportive of Scottish Independence on the basis of breaking up the "racist imperialist British state", or just generally being anti-English Tories, so I'm a bit unusual in that respect.
Exactly, the Scottish hard left supports independence to make Scotland a far left, woke state. They have zero time for Wallace and Bruce and Scottish nationalism.
Hence the divisions now coming to the fore on transgender rights etc between the woke Scottish Yes backers and the more traditional Scottish nationalists, the latter particularly loyal to Salmond
Things and people that HYUFD has clung to as destroyers of Scottish Indy, a timeline.
David Cameron Better Together Indy Scotland being chucked out of the EU Ruth Davidson reviving SCon fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Corbyn reviving SLab's fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Theresa May Boris Johnson reviving SCon fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Jo Swinson running for Holytood and leading Unionist fightback Alex Salmond being found guilty thus discrediting the Indy cause Alex Salmond cleared starting SNP civil war Starmer reviving SLab's fortunes and leading Unionist fightback Divisions between woke Scottish Yes backers and traditional Scottish nationalists
I'm sure I've missed a few, please feel free anyone who wants to add to this impressive list.
Jim Murphy leading Scottish Labour from a cubby hole in the Palace of Westminster
NHS good news, my Dads cancer biopsy, planned for March 29th, has been rearranged for July 2nd. The bad news is, having been allowed out for the first time in 3 months, he has to self isolate for the 14 days prior to the event
AIUI that’s now standard practice for anyone undergoing a procedure under GA (they’ve found very poor outcomes for GA patients who have or get COVID) - but not for outpatients.
Of course there is a strong chance this really is just stupid Antifa bell-ends, with no idea how badly they are damaging the cause.
But if it is black ops by the Right/HMG then yes, it is clever, because it is too subtle for most people to think through. We have all seen the protestors urinating on Churchill etc, we all know they've binned Little Britain and Fawlty, when people see Penny Lane being defaced they won't try and tease out the implications, they will just get very very angry
And they are angry. Liverpudlians are fuming on Twitter
If I wanted to make Black Lives Matter look terrible, I would deface Churchill, Fawlty Towers and the Beatles: three utterly beloved symbols of Britishness
And if I was in Scotland I'd go for Robert the Bruce
I’m confused. Isn’t Hitchens all insistent on freedom? So why is he railing against the freedom to shop on whatever day you like and the freedom to sell things on whatever day you like?
It almost seems as though he believes that people should only be “free” to live the way he approves and to do things of which he approves. And, in fact, those should be compulsory, and if they’re not, it’s an attack on freedom.
This is one issue that very sharply divides Conservatives. I keep re-visiting it myself. But, on balance, I think I prefer current Sunday trading laws.
It makes Sundays special and I think it's positive for society (in general) to have a family day each week when we're not feverishly working or shopping.
I would keep (as I think is currently the case) all leisure, restaurant and pubs open though - which isn't the case in socially conservative places, like Switzerland.
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it?
No.
Slave trading was "part" of his business (as were many merchants of the day) - how much is not known, but since he traded in lots of other areas as well, its extremely unlikely it was "all":
No, it doesn't. You thought it was fine to tear down the statue of Colston with mob violence. Polls do not support that. They say "remove" to a museum.
You also agreed with the tearing down of the statue of Robert Milligan. He was not a slave trader, but a slave owner, which is a significant difference.
Hmm - surely slave onwers had to trade in slaves to get them in the first place unless by inheritance or breeding? And didn';t they swapsies with other owners to get their slave selection just right?
Colston's entire fortune was built on shipping slaves across the Atlantic, as I understand it? He drove the hideous business.
That seems very different to someone who bought and sold and owned slaves, which - however horrific - was extremely common before Britain heroically abolished it because we are great; all the early US presidents, and Founding Fathers, owned slaves, probably the vast majority of kings and queens in history owned slaves, all the Roman emperors, bigwigs, all the Greek philosophers, leading thinkers in ISIS, the Prophet Muhammad, and so on.
If "slave owning" is enough to get your statue pulled down, then there will have to be an orgy of toppling
Starting with this monarch?
In 1562 Captain John Hawkins was the first known Englishman to include enslaved Africans in his cargo. Queen Elizabeth approved of his journey, during which he captured 300 Africans. He then sailed across the North Atlantic and exchanged them for hides, ginger and sugar. He returned to London in 1563. Thirsty for greater profits, he organised another voyage for 1564 to which Queen Elizabeth contributed one vessel. Meanwhile, the African presence in England became established to such an extent that attempts were made to limit their numbers. Queen Elizabeth enjoyed the profits of the Atlantic slave trade and employed African entertainers in her court but she issued a decree to expel Africans from England in July 1596.
Of course there is a strong chance this really is just stupid Antifa bell-ends, with no idea how badly they are damaging the cause.
But if it is black ops by the Right/HMG then yes, it is clever, because it is too subtle for most people to think through. We have all seen the protestors urinating on Churchill etc, we all know they've binned Little Britain and Fawlty, when people see Penny Lane being defaced they won't try and tease out the implications, they will just get very very angry
And they are angry. Liverpudlians are fuming on Twitter
On the corner is a fascist with a painting gun.
It's quite a thought. These things do happen.
there is no way this isn't a recent sociology graduate with a tonne of debt and a revolutionary cob on.
Comments
I answered your questions yesterday on what I believed in and how that was different to Trump and you went deadly silent once again. Do you have any ways in which you think I'm the same as Trump - or are you just so blinded by Brexit you can't see a difference between libertarian values and Trump?
There's a nice Fw 190 in the Gatow museum if you ever get to it.
Slave trading was "part" of his business (as were many merchants of the day) - how much is not known, but since he traded in lots of other areas as well, its extremely unlikely it was "all":
http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/History/bristolrecordsociety/publications/bha096.pdf
He died without children - because he never married. What's the oldest reason in the world for men not marrying?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-52992669
And, in my view, there was a lot to admire about the man. He was a brilliant general, who fought hard to defend his country. I've no idea why anyone would wish to deface his statue.
Perhaps I'm too sensitive sometimes.
Everyone is in stitches on the first telling, and maybe a couple more, but as time goes on it becomes less funny and even boring and replaced by another very funny joke
..and on that note, it is time to bid you all good night, as it is Friday and it is almost beer o'clock, so I wont have time to read Malcolmg's inarticulate rant at my previous post, which is a shame, because I do find him very amusing.
But clever?
Think I'd more go with malicious.
1) local neds* having a laugh, zero political content
2) Someone with a seriously confused understanding of histdory
3) first order false flag by rightw-ingers
4) Second order ditto by some other persuasion
* Anglice: chavs.
Ergo - wait and see who gets the Polis Scotland free ride in a patrol car.
PS: nice ME163 in background
Hence the divisions now coming to the fore on transgender rights etc between the woke Scottish Yes backers and the more traditional Scottish nationalists, the latter particularly loyal to Salmond
Good luck with that one pal!
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1271459309839360000?s=20
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1271478241631576069?s=20
Crap for workers, and an unnecessary cost for businesses who'll have to stay open to compete even though Sunday trade is already very slow. People aren't going to buy more stuff - just spread it out.
Isn’t Hitchens all insistent on freedom?
So why is he railing against the freedom to shop on whatever day you like and the freedom to sell things on whatever day you like?
It almost seems as though he believes that people should only be “free” to live the way he approves and to do things of which he approves. And, in fact, those should be compulsory, and if they’re not, it’s an attack on freedom.
So I'm not sure you have this right.
David Cameron
Better Together
Indy Scotland being chucked out of the EU
Ruth Davidson reviving SCon fortunes and leading Unionist fightback
Corbyn reviving SLab's fortunes and leading Unionist fightback
Theresa May
Boris Johnson reviving SCon fortunes and leading Unionist fightback
Jo Swinson running for Holytood and leading Unionist fightback
Alex Salmond being found guilty thus discrediting the Indy cause
Alex Salmond cleared starting SNP civil war
Starmer reviving SLab's fortunes and leading Unionist fightback
Divisions between woke Scottish Yes backers and traditional Scottish nationalists
I'm sure I've missed a few, please feel free anyone who wants to add to this impressive list.
It's quite a thought. These things do happen.
NEW THREAD?
I wouldn't say that, why?
It makes Sundays special and I think it's positive for society (in general) to have a family day each week when we're not feverishly working or shopping.
I would keep (as I think is currently the case) all leisure, restaurant and pubs open though - which isn't the case in socially conservative places, like Switzerland.
In 1562 Captain John Hawkins was the first known Englishman to include enslaved Africans in his cargo. Queen Elizabeth approved of his journey, during which he captured 300 Africans. He then sailed across the North Atlantic and exchanged them for hides, ginger and sugar. He returned to London in 1563. Thirsty for greater profits, he organised another voyage for 1564 to which Queen Elizabeth contributed one vessel.
Meanwhile, the African presence in England became established to such an extent that attempts were made to limit their numbers. Queen Elizabeth enjoyed the profits of the Atlantic slave trade and employed African entertainers in her court but she issued a decree to expel Africans from England in July 1596.