A story which rather tellingly isn't being told in the right wing press. Various trade bodies who represent significant swathes of the economy saying the new rules are so unworkable that the government need to reopen negotiations. This quote from the CEO of Make UK is key:
"“There are customs experts with 30 years’ experience who are baffled by what the new regulations mean, let alone small- and medium-sized businesses who have never had to deal with the kind of paperwork that is now required. The great fear is that for many it will prove too much and they will simply choose not to export to the EU.”"
The government didn't understand how trade works and have ended up with a deal which they don't understand. Having soent years saying fuck business and branding warnings as Project Fear it'll be a painful revelation to find out that manufacturing and logistics experts actually did know what they were talking about after all.
This isn't just "apply the same paperwork as you would for anywhere else what's the problem?" as some parrots on here have re-squawked. This is a deal which does not work at a fundamental practical level for the supply chain of the UK.
Final observation. However bad this gets for the government, Labour will struggle to profit. As the omnishambles deal collapses and the stupidity of both it's structure and the details is laid bare, Labour attacks will be batted aside with a simple line. "You voted for it". Bravo Keith, bravo.
Hardly - the final vote was between leaving without a deal or leaving with a deal.
Both versions introduced whole piles of paperwork the only thing the deal avoided was tariffs on top of the paperwork.
Sadly politicians (and the general public) think it's tariffs that creates issues but as anyone who has exported things will know it's the paperwork that takes time and kills you.
The Tories have a majority of 80. The deal was going to pass regardless of whether the opposition gave their consent or not. So the vote was the deal with our agreement or the deal without the agreement.
An important lesson Labour didn't learn from the Coalition. The coalition did a lot of positive things and a whole pile of negative things. Tory bills backed by LibDem MPs are still hung around the neck of the LibDems years later. "You voted for it". This is the fate that Labour have chosen.
Or as was pointed out by others on here in December - if Labour had voted no the result was attacks that they never wanted us to Leave.
It really was a no win choice for Labour - but I did say continually that they should have just taken the day off and left the Tories to it.
Sadly because of the Covid announcements that wasn't an option.
I suggest that in a few years time 'You never wanted us to Leave' is going to be far less damaging than 'You voted for it".
It would be even better if in a few years no one is ever talking about Brexit again.
Yours, A former Remainer.
Does 'A former Remainer' = 'now a Rejoiner'?
No.
We all need to move on from Brexit. I'm done with it. It's over.
Listening to Starmer on Marr he rejects reintroducing free movement of Labour which of course would see the UK rejoining the single market and customs union, but he said he would want to improve on this 'thin' deal.
Marr pointed out that he had told the Daily Mirror he would bring back free movement of Labour and that his many supporters will be angered by his answer. He reiterated he would not bring free movement of Labour and it must follow that those who support closer ties or rejoining can only have one home and it is not Labour
Step forward the Lib Dems or SNP in Scotland
You need to move on , there is a deal. We know you are anti Labour in every regard , I think we all get it by now. Step forward with what ?
Actually you are quite wrong
I am reporting an exchange between Marr and Starmer and his refusal to reintroduce freedom of movement and to have closer ties with Europe
This is not anti Labour, this is where Starmer is and we all know there is a large cohort of Labour supporters who want closer ties or to rejoin the EU and Labour are not going to go there
Hence Lib Dems and SNP and Plaid are the home of those who desire EU membership
And Starmer is not at all a no go as Corbyn was and as of now I am open to persuasion by either of the main parties for my vote in 2024 subject to me keeping taking my pills and hopefully being vaccinated at sometime in the next few weeks
Starmer is sensibly making Labour a party Redwall voters can consider voting for again, leaving the diehard Remainers as you say to the LDs, Greens, SNP and Plaid
You seem to be suggesting that Scotland is now diehard remain. Fair play for accepting that.
It isn't, Yougov showed even most Scots wanted the Deal to pass.
45% of Scots only voted SNP in 2019, 55% did not
+9.5 lib dem, +1.0 green
Though the LDs are a Unionist party despite opposing the Brexit Deal
LDs are a Unionist party who see strength in unity - hence their support of the UK in the EU, and Scotland in the UK. It is entirely consistent.
To support Brexit because "sovereignty" and deny Scotland its independence is what is inconsistent.
I voted Remain and am also a Unionist, I just respect the Leave vote which occurred 46 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine 'once in a generation' referendum
Quebec had referendums only 15 years apart (1980 and 1995).
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
He could EASILY become a Piers Morgan of the Right. A Tucker Carlson of the UK. He’s sharp, agile and at ease on TV. And he has a ready audience of millions who agree with, or even find him heroic (for clarity: I don’t)
And he has that incredible CV.
On the other hand I think he’d struggle in ANY constituency to win and become an MP. Too many loathe him.
Incredible CV of standing in SEVEN Westminster elections or by-elections and losing every one of them?
A very well written and argued article by Alastair, as is usual with his pieces. Unfortunately, it comes from the same mindset that dominates much of the discussion on here which is to ask, when deciding to condemn something or not, "who is doing it?" rather than "is the act wrong?".
First of all, Trump is not a wannabee dictator who dreams of gleaming jackboots marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. His mindset is of a CEO: he's conditioned to giving orders and having them obeyed. It's why business leaders make bad political leaders because they are unaccustomed to the checks and balances of political systems and why he gets mad at SC judges or political appointees not following his whims. But the idea he wants a fascist regime out of the pages of Gilead is fantasy doom-porn thinking on the part of the Democrats who need something to keep their coalition together. It wasn't sinister Government forces that led to a light Police presence at last week's demo, it was the Capitol Police assumed they would not be trouble, which (conversely) is why the National Guard were deployed for BLM rallies, which had a habit of ending in disturbances.
As for impeaching him or not, the reason for saying it would cause division is not the prosecution itself: if he has committed impeachable offences, he should be tried. It is because everyone knows it would be selective and based on targeting the individual involved rather than the act itself is worthy of impeachable. The same people on here who argue most vehemently that Trump is guilty of treason are the same ones who tie themselves in knots arguing why Democrat politicians encouraging BLM protests even given the violence. You want Trump charged with incitement? Sure go ahead. But I think Kamala Harris who said BLM protests should continue to the election, also was recklessly inciting violence, even though she covered her ass with the mealy mouthed "violence is never right". She is a political and ex-AG. She knew how her words about the protests would be interpreted.
And for all those lawyers on here who are so exercised about the constitutional damage Trump has caused, where's your outrage over Nancy Pelosi - who has absolutely no role in this under the US Constitution - calling the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss the nuclear chain of command? Everyone knows it was a stunt but it's a dangerous one. But who of the many on here who get so exercised about little action Trump does criticised something that potentially has very far-reaching consequences?
Read "Why Nations Fail". One of the key points in there for a nation's success or not is that everyone feels as though the rules and laws are fair and applied to all. If there is going to be anything that destroys trust democracy, it is going to be this selective picking of what is right or wrong.
If Trump broke laws he should be prosecuted. I understand all the arguments for "healing" but that seems like a pretext for avoiding accountability for one's actions. To have genuine healing there needs to be justice first.
This. We'll probably here it a lot from Republicans in the Senate (I don't condone what he did, but this is not the time to stir up tensions etc) because it is an easy way out, a way to pretend problems do not need to be confronted to be solved.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Tony Blair has held secret talks with the health secretary about the government’s Covid-19 strategy, as the former prime minister seeks a “de Gaulle-style comeback” more than a decade after leaving office.
I don't think Trump is a fascist. I don't think he has any attachment to any political philosophy. I don't think he has any sense of patriotism, let alone nationalism. He is entirely and totally in it for himself. There is nothing else. Because of that he will associate with anyone and anything that he believes will further his own interests. He took the election defeat as a personal humiliation (as it was) and because of that has sought to do whatever possible to overturn it, up to and including insurrection. Last Wednesday was a coup, but it was not one designed to promote an ideology or secure the interests of a class. It was all about Trump not being able to handle being a loser. That's why he authorised it. Though it was probably not why others took part.
Does one need an ideology to be classed as a fascist? I don’t think so.
Fascism is an ideology, isn't it?
Wikipedia says it’s a far right ideology - but I tend to think it’s more about dictatorships and oppression.
I find it hard to accept a definition for fascism that covers Pol Pot or Mao.
How would you classify them?
Totalitarians.
The Big 5 criteria for fascism -
Viewing a country as your personal property and yourself as its embodiment. Contempt for democracy and judicial independence. Opponents = Enemies. Fetishization of the Nation and its superiority over others - who are to be "beaten". Elevation of the true blood "real" people over minorities and incomers. Leather.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
I am making another shout out to that Snyder column in the NYT. All PBers should read it.
This para in particular nails it: Post-truth is pre-fascism, and Trump has been our post-truth president. When we give up on truth, we concede power to those with the wealth and charisma to create spectacle in its place. Without agreement about some basic facts, citizens cannot form the civil society that would allow them to defend themselves. If we lose the institutions that produce facts that are pertinent to us, then we tend to wallow in attractive abstractions and fictions. Truth defends itself particularly poorly when there is not very much of it around, and the era of Trump — like the era of Vladimir Putin in Russia — is one of the decline of local news. Social media is no substitute: It supercharges the mental habits by which we seek emotional stimulation and comfort, which means losing the distinction between what feels true and what actually is true.
One of the problems with Brexit is that it is based on various lies, and indeed those lies must be perpetuated by a government which flirts with “post-truth”.
“There’s no border in the Irish Sea” “We will prosper mightily” “The deal guarantees free and frictionless trade”
I'm very uneasy about free speech being policed by Amazon or other web hosting companies. If they host websites that are breaking the law by inciting violence then it's up to the police to bring a cease and desist order to have the website shut down.
I don't know if Parler is breaking the law, I know that Trump did by inciting a mob to overthrow the government so Twitter and the rest are more than justified to throw him of their platforms for doing so.
Auiu, under the current laws a social media network isn't a publisher and aren't responsible for what people post on their website. It shouldn't be the decision of private companies to say who is and isn't allowed a platform.
I think you have to draw a line at the appropriate point in the stack. Twitter banning Trump, or anyone else for whatever reason they like, seems fine to me. If you don't like it, use another website. I think they handled Trump just right: They let him speak as far as possible, to the point of stretching their TOS a little bit, put up warnings when he was telling big, dangerous lies, and finally banned him for incitement to violence.
Apple and Google banning Parler is creepy. They're within their rights to do it, but they have effective control over people's devices that's practically extremely hard to circumvent. There's a risk that we end up with something like the banking system, where people can be effectively be cut off by private businesses, but they're potentially being leaned on by politicians and other powerful people. This gives you the worst of both worlds: You have government action that's too wide to circumvent, but you have no redress, because it's technically being done by a private business that has the right not to serve you.
I'm not sure if there's a *regulatory* fix for this - more political involvement probably makes it worse - but we should definitely be promoting technical workarounds like getting comfortable with f-droid, getting Google services off your phone, not buying Apple stuff, building stuff with censorship-resistant protocols.
This is one of the cases where you have to imagine how you'd feel if the weapon was deployed against someone you like and not just scumbags like the Trumpists, because by the time that happens it will be too late to respond.
+1. It is an ominous and dangerous development. Wokeism, and the censorship or self-censorship that comes with it, is being driven by China and Russia on social media, so as to foment western division, and to make us abandon one of our key advantages: Free Speech
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
She went on to back the republican who defeated the sitting Rep senator in the Alaska primary - that senator who went on to defend her seat tho not on the ballot and only the second ever to win a senate seat as a write-in. Palin's choice losing in her home state shows how her pull had gone. The winning senator rejoined the Reps and is today the first of her side to call for trump to go
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
Yes, there used to be a prevailing view on PB that pseudonyms, noms de plume, or - as they were inelegantly known here “multiple screen names” were some sort of grave crime. It was then, as it is now, an utterly pathetic attack.
I think it was Nick Palmer Ex MP who essentially nailed it when he asked: “Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?”
Which was a very good question I think.
In any case, Leon has improved in recent days. He is rather less boring and has thankfully rolled back somewhat on the doom pornography which was in danger of defining him.
Is Sean banned from the site? I always assumed Byronic was a pseudonym.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Your kidding, right? Without Nigel there would have been no Brexit. I mean I enjoy discussing with people about this because it is so transparently obvious that I can do something useful, such as ring my aged aunt at the same time as posting about it.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
I rather miss SeanT and the way he used to excite us all with information about his fabulous earnings, advances, translation rights, film rights - the full monty. I imagine by now he's safely housed on a private island with a select coterie of fellow multimillionaires, far too busy to drop by here. There was a tantalising cameo appearance on election night, 2019, if memory serves, but after that nothing to alleviate the gathering gloom and the slowly ticking clock. So if you happen to be reading this, Sean, good on yer, mate. You're a legend. Maybe you always were.
Legends don't buy a Mini to drive around in....!
Depends on whether it was a proper mini or the new modern abortion. Legends drive old minis.
From memory its a modern Cooper S - so not even the full fat JCW version.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
Yes, there used to be a prevailing view on PB that pseudonyms, noms de plume, or - as they were inelegantly known here “multiple screen names” were some sort of grave crime. It was then, as it is now, an utterly pathetic attack.
I think it was Nick Palmer Ex MP who essentially nailed it when he asked: “Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?”
Which was a very good question I think.
In any case, Leon has improved in recent days. He is rather less boring and has thankfully rolled back somewhat on the doom pornography which was in danger of defining him.
Is Sean banned from the site? I always assumed Byronic was a pseudonym.
Sean asked for his posts to be deleted and has since appeared with pseudonym accounts that are usually easy to spot due to the poster's insane business...
Mr. Walker, you're ascribing too much to cunning deceit and too little to Boris Johnson being both a complete imbecile and quite content to lie for headlines.
It's incompetence and stupidity with a wafer-thin veneer of bullshit as an afterthought, rather than a fascist masterplan.
On disinformation etc, this will be hard to fight. Mainstream media can help themselves by being more objective. They won't, by and large.
I voted Remain and am also a Unionist, I just respect the Leave vote which occurred 46 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine 'once in a generation' referendum
I'm sure you would accept, however, the EEC we joined in 1973 and which was confirmed in 1975 was a very different animal from the EU we left last year.
You'd probably also accept the UK of 2020 was very different from the UK in 1975. Perhaps the divergence was always there and by 2016 the tie had become so strained it snapped.
The question now is whether the divergence will continue or whether a new convergence will occur.
These things happen - in 2010, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats converged to such an extent they were able to form a Coalition Government. Presumably, you supported it then as I did but the divergences since then make a similar prospect inconceivable.
The rate of change obviates against grandiose "once in a generation" statements. I would argue the relationship between the UK and EU will evolve in the next decade and it may well be revisiting the question of the relationship and whether that has reached the point when negotiations to consider re-joining the EU might begin will come to the fore sooner than in 20-30 years. After all, it took us 15 years to join the first time.
Clearly, re-joining the EU, were that to mean adopting the Euro and Schengen, would be wholly unacceptable at this time but a new trading relationship bringing us closer to the EU wouldn't need a new referendum were a Party advocating such a course to win a General Election.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
He could EASILY become a Piers Morgan of the Right. A Tucker Carlson of the UK. He’s sharp, agile and at ease on TV. And he has a ready audience of millions who agree with, or even find him heroic (for clarity: I don’t)
And he has that incredible CV.
On the other hand I think he’d struggle in ANY constituency to win and become an MP. Too many loathe him.
Incredible CV of standing in SEVEN Westminster elections or by-elections and losing every one of them?
Even that achievement only makes him a second-rate Screaming Lord Sutch.
Edit: Third-rate. I'd forgotten about Lt Cdr. William Boaks, RN (Retd.)
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
He could EASILY become a Piers Morgan of the Right. A Tucker Carlson of the UK. He’s sharp, agile and at ease on TV. And he has a ready audience of millions who agree with, or even find him heroic (for clarity: I don’t)
And he has that incredible CV.
On the other hand I think he’d struggle in ANY constituency to win and become an MP. Too many loathe him.
Incredible CV of standing in SEVEN Westminster elections or by-elections and losing every one of them?
An amateur compared to Lt Cdr. William Boaks, RN (Retd.)
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
I don't think people will forget Trump. Maybe just send him to St Helena.
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
I don't think people will forget Trump. Maybe just send him to St Helena.
Too accessible now it has an airstrip.
Pitcairn.
Though I see that the 'capital' of Tristan de Cunha, Edinburgh of the Seven Seas,'is regarded as the most remote permanent settlement on Earth, being 2,173 kilometres (1,350 mi)[2] from the nearest other human settlement, on Saint Helena', so that'd make a good choice.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
I rather miss SeanT and the way he used to excite us all with information about his fabulous earnings, advances, translation rights, film rights - the full monty. I imagine by now he's safely housed on a private island with a select coterie of fellow multimillionaires, far too busy to drop by here. There was a tantalising cameo appearance on election night, 2019, if memory serves, but after that nothing to alleviate the gathering gloom and the slowly ticking clock. So if you happen to be reading this, Sean, good on yer, mate. You're a legend. Maybe you always were.
Legends don't buy a Mini to drive around in....!
Depends on whether it was a proper mini or the new modern abortion. Legends drive old minis.
The R50-R57 BMW Minis have been a colossal commercial success. I wouldn’t be seen fucking dead in one but you can't argue with engineering and marketing acumen behind them.
The ADO15 Minis are iconic and charming but are fucking deathtraps and more than a bit rust prone. I wrote one off in the early 90s while pretending to be Paddy Hopkirk at the 1964 Monte Carlo Rally but I didn't care because it belonged to RAF Valley.
I'm very uneasy about free speech being policed by Amazon or other web hosting companies. If they host websites that are breaking the law by inciting violence then it's up to the police to bring a cease and desist order to have the website shut down.
I don't know if Parler is breaking the law, I know that Trump did by inciting a mob to overthrow the government so Twitter and the rest are more than justified to throw him of their platforms for doing so.
Auiu, under the current laws a social media network isn't a publisher and aren't responsible for what people post on their website. It shouldn't be the decision of private companies to say who is and isn't allowed a platform.
I think you have to draw a line at the appropriate point in the stack. Twitter banning Trump, or anyone else for whatever reason they like, seems fine to me. If you don't like it, use another website. I think they handled Trump just right: They let him speak as far as possible, to the point of stretching their TOS a little bit, put up warnings when he was telling big, dangerous lies, and finally banned him for incitement to violence.
Apple and Google banning Parler is creepy. They're within their rights to do it, but they have effective control over people's devices that's practically extremely hard to circumvent. There's a risk that we end up with something like the banking system, where people can be effectively be cut off by private businesses, but they're potentially being leaned on by politicians and other powerful people. This gives you the worst of both worlds: You have government action that's too wide to circumvent, but you have no redress, because it's technically being done by a private business that has the right not to serve you.
I'm not sure if there's a *regulatory* fix for this - more political involvement probably makes it worse - but we should definitely be promoting technical workarounds like getting comfortable with f-droid, getting Google services off your phone, not buying Apple stuff, building stuff with censorship-resistant protocols.
This is one of the cases where you have to imagine how you'd feel if the weapon was deployed against someone you like and not just scumbags like the Trumpists, because by the time that happens it will be too late to respond.
+1. It is an ominous and dangerous development. Wokeism, and the censorship or self-censorship that comes with it, is being driven by China and Russia on social media, so as to foment western division, and to make us abandon one of our key advantages: Free Speech
I agree with Edmund too on both points, though not with your dragging in the tiresome obsessions with Wokeism, sinophobia and russophobia. Big private companies are quite capable of making unhelpful decisions to suit their public image without the slightest interest in Woke, China or Russia. The point is simply that virtual monopolies should be bound by rules reflecting the need for freedom of speech within the law.
A story which rather tellingly isn't being told in the right wing press. Various trade bodies who represent significant swathes of the economy saying the new rules are so unworkable that the government need to reopen negotiations. This quote from the CEO of Make UK is key:
"“There are customs experts with 30 years’ experience who are baffled by what the new regulations mean, let alone small- and medium-sized businesses who have never had to deal with the kind of paperwork that is now required. The great fear is that for many it will prove too much and they will simply choose not to export to the EU.”"
The government didn't understand how trade works and have ended up with a deal which they don't understand. Having soent years saying fuck business and branding warnings as Project Fear it'll be a painful revelation to find out that manufacturing and logistics experts actually did know what they were talking about after all.
This isn't just "apply the same paperwork as you would for anywhere else what's the problem?" as some parrots on here have re-squawked. This is a deal which does not work at a fundamental practical level for the supply chain of the UK.
Final observation. However bad this gets for the government, Labour will struggle to profit. As the omnishambles deal collapses and the stupidity of both it's structure and the details is laid bare, Labour attacks will be batted aside with a simple line. "You voted for it". Bravo Keith, bravo.
Hardly - the final vote was between leaving without a deal or leaving with a deal.
Both versions introduced whole piles of paperwork the only thing the deal avoided was tariffs on top of the paperwork.
Sadly politicians (and the general public) think it's tariffs that creates issues but as anyone who has exported things will know it's the paperwork that takes time and kills you.
The Tories have a majority of 80. The deal was going to pass regardless of whether the opposition gave their consent or not. So the vote was the deal with our agreement or the deal without the agreement.
An important lesson Labour didn't learn from the Coalition. The coalition did a lot of positive things and a whole pile of negative things. Tory bills backed by LibDem MPs are still hung around the neck of the LibDems years later. "You voted for it". This is the fate that Labour have chosen.
Or as was pointed out by others on here in December - if Labour had voted no the result was attacks that they never wanted us to Leave.
It really was a no win choice for Labour - but I did say continually that they should have just taken the day off and left the Tories to it.
Sadly because of the Covid announcements that wasn't an option.
I suggest that in a few years time 'You never wanted us to Leave' is going to be far less damaging than 'You voted for it".
It would be even better if in a few years no one is ever talking about Brexit again.
Yours, A former Remainer.
Does 'A former Remainer' = 'now a Rejoiner'?
No.
We all need to move on from Brexit. I'm done with it. It's over.
Listening to Starmer on Marr he rejects reintroducing free movement of Labour which of course would see the UK rejoining the single market and customs union, but he said he would want to improve on this 'thin' deal.
Marr pointed out that he had told the Daily Mirror he would bring back free movement of Labour and that his many supporters will be angered by his answer. He reiterated he would not bring free movement of Labour and it must follow that those who support closer ties or rejoining can only have one home and it is not Labour
Step forward the Lib Dems or SNP in Scotland
You need to move on , there is a deal. We know you are anti Labour in every regard , I think we all get it by now. Step forward with what ?
Actually you are quite wrong
I am reporting an exchange between Marr and Starmer and his refusal to reintroduce freedom of movement and to have closer ties with Europe
This is not anti Labour, this is where Starmer is and we all know there is a large cohort of Labour supporters who want closer ties or to rejoin the EU and Labour are not going to go there
Hence Lib Dems and SNP and Plaid are the home of those who desire EU membership
And Starmer is not at all a no go as Corbyn was and as of now I am open to persuasion by either of the main parties for my vote in 2024 subject to me keeping taking my pills and hopefully being vaccinated at sometime in the next few weeks
Starmer is sensibly making Labour a party Redwall voters can consider voting for again, leaving the diehard Remainers as you say to the LDs, Greens, SNP and Plaid
You seem to be suggesting that Scotland is now diehard remain. Fair play for accepting that.
It isn't, Yougov showed even most Scots wanted the Deal to pass.
45% of Scots only voted SNP in 2019, 55% did not
+9.5 lib dem, +1.0 green
Though the LDs are a Unionist party despite opposing the Brexit Deal
LDs are a Unionist party who see strength in unity - hence their support of the UK in the EU, and Scotland in the UK. It is entirely consistent.
To support Brexit because "sovereignty" and deny Scotland its independence is what is inconsistent.
I voted Remain and am also a Unionist, I just respect the Leave vote which occurred 46 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine 'once in a generation' referendum
The Good Friday Agreement allows for a plebiscite every 7 years.
Tony Blair has held secret talks with the health secretary about the government’s Covid-19 strategy, as the former prime minister seeks a “de Gaulle-style comeback” more than a decade after leaving office.
I would be quite happy if former PMs gave it another go to contribute to public service through parliament.
But isn't SKS re-forming the same band with a new lead-singer ?
These reformed bands are never as successful second time round.
Either the lead singer has lost his floppy boyish good looks and the remaining band members are flabby with royalty checks.
Or the new band members don't have the brio and panache of the originals.
Because once the magic has gone ... it has really gone.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
Yes, there used to be a prevailing view on PB that pseudonyms, noms de plume, or - as they were inelegantly known here “multiple screen names” were some sort of grave crime. It was then, as it is now, an utterly pathetic attack.
I think it was Nick Palmer Ex MP who essentially nailed it when he asked: “Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?”
Which was a very good question I think.
In any case, Leon has improved in recent days. He is rather less boring and has thankfully rolled back somewhat on the doom pornography which was in danger of defining him.
Is Sean banned from the site? I always assumed Byronic was a pseudonym.
Sean asked for his posts to be deleted and has since appeared with pseudonym accounts that are usually easy to spot due to the poster's insane business...
I presume Sean's publishers had a stern word with him. Which is fair enough, some of thosewine-fuelled rants were rather, er, controversial shall we say.
Fucking hell! The list of events which these fascists expect to happen:
1. Expect the emergency broadcast system to be activated. The FCC just recently released a memorandum speaking to the requirements under Federal law to send messages from the president to the public. See this link 2. Expect confusion. We are in a battle for our republic against elites that are attempting the very coup that they are accusing Trump of doing. In battle, there will be disinformation but know that plans are being fulfilled. 3. Expect high profile arrests to take place over the next 12 days and at any time. You may wake one morning to find someone in high office is no longer there. 4. Expect this to be a bumpy ride to the very end. This is not a television show where things are resolved in 45 minutes. 5. Expect more bombshell evidence to be released between now and Jan. 20th. 6. Expect some sort of internet blackout or outage: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Gmail are likely going to be affected. If you don’t have alternate forms of communication established now, it would be a good idea to start forming them even if it’s just checking on your nextdoor neighbors. 7. Expect Trump to be inaugurated on Jan 20th! 8. Expect the executive order from 2018 and/or the Insurrection Act to be enacted. This DOES NOT mean martial law. Remember that we have been under a state of emergency since 2018 which gives the president many powers to act.
I think it is 2m this week. I'd been told at the beginning of the week that the NHS was due supply of over 2m and that there was confidence that all of the doses could be used with the existing network which is build for between two and three million per week.
Assuming it's not a maths error from Hancock (which wouldn't surprise me) and we've hit 2m this week it should be a stepping stone to 4m per week by the end of January so that by the time we get to week 12 and second jabs there's almost 40m people who've had the first one and the remaining 15m first can be done alongside as second jabs ramp up and additional capacity can be added for a few weeks to get everyone a first jab by the end of May and fully immunised with two jabs by the end of August.
That timeframe seems to be what Hancock was referring when he said by autumn all adults would get it.
I reckon it was all down to Gordon Brittas and his hashtag he has been tweeting all week...that got it done.
This Gordon Brittas thing really isn’t working.
Too late. The Brittas connection has taken on a life of its own now.
You might as well try to get people to spell Kier's name correctly - it's just not happening
The Brittas Empire is almost 30 years old from its premiere. I vaguelly recall it, but I don't think it ever left as big an impact on the public consciousness as something like Blackadder or Yes Minister. I struggle to see it making inroads even among people who do remember it.
I think people may be taking my Sunday levity a bit too seriously...
To give my real opinion, I think Sir Keir would do a great job running a leisure centre.
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
I don't think people will forget Trump. Maybe just send him to St Helena.
Too accessible now it has an airstrip.
Pitcairn.
If he comes to Prestwick, Nicola can exile him to Rockall.
A rock covered in seagull shit is just right for his new home.
We have this ludicrous notion of "conservatives" wanting their echo chamber so they can talk to themselves, agree with themselves and thus opinion is further polarised.
I think banning Trump from Twitter is wrong on so many levels - the problem with free speech isn't the freedom but the speech. Sites like this encourage plurality and diversity to a point but it seems some on both Right and Left would rather not engage with people with whom they disagree.
I can only surmise some find it impossible to accept either elements of their own position might be wrong or that elements of their opponent's position might be right. Why is it so many want not to be challenged and simply want their own belief systems re-enforced?
I suppose if you want to live a hedgehog life, curled up in your own belief systems and instinctively hostile to anyone who thinks differently, that's fine but that becomes a hugely limiting worldview.
Tony Blair has held secret talks with the health secretary about the government’s Covid-19 strategy, as the former prime minister seeks a “de Gaulle-style comeback” more than a decade after leaving office.
I would be quite happy if former PMs gave it another go to contribute to public service through parliament.
But isn't SKS re-forming the same band with a new lead-singer ?
These reformed bands are never as successful second time round.
Either the lead singer has lost his floppy boyish good looks and the remaining band members are flabby with royalty checks.
Or the new band members don't have the brio and panache of the originals.
Because once the magic has gone ... it has really gone.
Probably, and it may not be a good idea in this case. But I like the idea in principle.
That might be one of the most jaw dropping things I've ever seen. Alex Jones said Sandy Hook was a hoax for Christ's sake, and he's had enough of these lads? Though it seems more like he just cannot maintain a straight face about it.
I think we can safely assume that almost all of these guys from whose eyes the scales have suddenly fallen would still have them firmly attached if the coup/epic foot stamping by a set of unhinged losers/morally justified protest had in any way actually disrupted the democratic process and kept Trump relevant. It's probably overly simplistic and others have made the same point, but the loser is further outwith the US pale than the racist, liar, seditionary and incipient fascist
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Your kidding, right? Without Nigel there would have been no Brexit. I mean I enjoy discussing with people about this because it is so transparently obvious that I can do something useful, such as ring my aged aunt at the same time as posting about it.
No I am not kidding. Backbenchers were more important than Farage.
Backbenchers were the reason Major struggled with Maastricht rebellions. Backbenchers were the reason Cameron was forced to concede the referendum, before UKIP took off in the polls. Backbenchers were the reason Theresa May failed to get her deal through.
Farage was a noisy bystander jumping on the bandwagon. If it wasn't for the backbenchers then May would have got her deal through, Cameron would never have needed to offer a referendum, Major would not have seen the party torn apart over Maastricht.
This could have happened with or without Farage. It couldn't have happened without backbenchers.
A very well written and argued article by Alastair, as is usual with his pieces. Unfortunately, it comes from the same mindset that dominates much of the discussion on here which is to ask, when deciding to condemn something or not, "who is doing it?" rather than "is the act wrong?".
First of all, Trump is not a wannabee dictator who dreams of gleaming jackboots marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. His mindset is of a CEO: he's conditioned to giving orders and having them obeyed. It's why business leaders make bad political leaders because they are unaccustomed to the checks and balances of political systems and why he gets mad at SC judges or political appointees not following his whims. But the idea he wants a fascist regime out of the pages of Gilead is fantasy doom-porn thinking on the part of the Democrats who need something to keep their coalition together. It wasn't sinister Government forces that led to a light Police presence at last week's demo, it was the Capitol Police assumed they would not be trouble, which (conversely) is why the National Guard were deployed for BLM rallies, which had a habit of ending in disturbances.
As for impeaching him or not, the reason for saying it would cause division is not the prosecution itself: if he has committed impeachable offences, he should be tried. It is because everyone knows it would be selective and based on targeting the individual involved rather than the act itself is worthy of impeachable. The same people on here who argue most vehemently that Trump is guilty of treason are the same ones who tie themselves in knots arguing why Democrat politicians encouraging BLM protests even given the violence. You want Trump charged with incitement? Sure go ahead. But I think Kamala Harris who said BLM protests should continue to the election, also was recklessly inciting violence, even though she covered her ass with the mealy mouthed "violence is never right". She is a political and ex-AG. She knew how her words about the protests would be interpreted.
And for all those lawyers on here who are so exercised about the constitutional damage Trump has caused, where's your outrage over Nancy Pelosi - who has absolutely no role in this under the US Constitution - calling the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss the nuclear chain of command? Everyone knows it was a stunt but it's a dangerous one. But who of the many on here who get so exercised about little action Trump does criticised something that potentially has very far-reaching consequences?
Read "Why Nations Fail". One of the key points in there for a nation's success or not is that everyone feels as though the rules and laws are fair and applied to all. If there is going to be anything that destroys trust democracy, it is going to be this selective picking of what is right or wrong.
That's a very long way of saying that the law should be applied equally to all.
Sorry, I don't mean to sound snarky. But that's what you are saying in essence. And you're right. The laws on incitement and violence etc should be applied equally to all. As should all other laws eg on the right to vote.
Part of the difficulty the US has is that this has not been happening. Blacks feel that their right to vote is being slowly salami-sliced away by the various voter suppression techniques being used. Or that their right to walk the streets freely without being constantly picked and questioned by the police is less than it should be. Other groups will have their own complaints.
And what makes this particularly toxic is that in some cases one group which feels ignored feels that it needs to do down another group to feel better about itself. This racist legacy was deliberately stoked by Trump.
If Trump broke laws he should be prosecuted. I understand all the arguments for "healing" but that seems like a pretext for avoiding accountability for one's actions. To have genuine healing there needs to be justice first.
The argument that Trump should carry on his acts of sedition post Presidency in the name of "healing" is utterly ridiculous.
I am not a big fan of Mark Drakeford, were I to stand outside the Sennedd and incite a bunch of people even less enthused by Drakeford than I am, and they were armed with cable ties, ropes and assorted weaponry to enter the building, it would not look good. If they then entered the chamber with malice aforethought and damaged property, but were thwarted from taking matters further I would be looking at a growing charge sheet. If, sadly in securing the Senedd a South Wales Police Officer and three protestors were killed I would be in Butetown Police Station awaiting my Magistrates appearance prior to being remanded for Crown Court later.
I'm very uneasy about free speech being policed by Amazon or other web hosting companies. If they host websites that are breaking the law by inciting violence then it's up to the police to bring a cease and desist order to have the website shut down.
I don't know if Parler is breaking the law, I know that Trump did by inciting a mob to overthrow the government so Twitter and the rest are more than justified to throw him of their platforms for doing so.
Auiu, under the current laws a social media network isn't a publisher and aren't responsible for what people post on their website. It shouldn't be the decision of private companies to say who is and isn't allowed a platform.
I think you have to draw a line at the appropriate point in the stack. Twitter banning Trump, or anyone else for whatever reason they like, seems fine to me. If you don't like it, use another website. I think they handled Trump just right: They let him speak as far as possible, to the point of stretching their TOS a little bit, put up warnings when he was telling big, dangerous lies, and finally banned him for incitement to violence.
Apple and Google banning Parler is creepy. They're within their rights to do it, but they have effective control over people's devices that's practically extremely hard to circumvent. There's a risk that we end up with something like the banking system, where people can be effectively be cut off by private businesses, but they're potentially being leaned on by politicians and other powerful people. This gives you the worst of both worlds: You have government action that's too wide to circumvent, but you have no redress, because it's technically being done by a private business that has the right not to serve you.
I'm not sure if there's a *regulatory* fix for this - more political involvement probably makes it worse - but we should definitely be promoting technical workarounds like getting comfortable with f-droid, getting Google services off your phone, not buying Apple stuff, building stuff with censorship-resistant protocols.
This is one of the cases where you have to imagine how you'd feel if the weapon was deployed against someone you like and not just scumbags like the Trumpists, because by the time that happens it will be too late to respond.
9 +1. It is an ominous and dangerous development. Wokeism, and the censorship or self-censorship that comes with it, is being driven by China and Russia on social media, so as to foment western division, and to make us abandon one of our key advantages: Free Speech
I agree with Edmund too on both points, though not with your dragging in the tiresome obsessions with Wokeism, sinophobia and russophobia. Big private companies are quite capable of making unhelpful decisions to suit their public image without the slightest interest in Woke, China or Russia. The point is simply that virtual monopolies should be bound by rules reflecting the need for freedom of speech within the law.
Russia, China and 'wokeism' (not necessarily well defined) are all major threats to liberal values.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Your kidding, right? Without Nigel there would have been no Brexit. I mean I enjoy discussing with people about this because it is so transparently obvious that I can do something useful, such as ring my aged aunt at the same time as posting about it.
No I am not kidding. Backbenchers were more important than Farage.
Backbenchers were the reason Major struggled with Maastricht rebellions. Backbenchers were the reason Cameron was forced to concede the referendum, before UKIP took off in the polls. Backbenchers were the reason Theresa May failed to get her deal through.
Farage was a noisy bystander jumping on the bandwagon. If it wasn't for the backbenchers then May would have got her deal through, Cameron would never have needed to offer a referendum, Major would not have seen the party torn apart over Maastricht.
This could have happened with or without Farage. It couldn't have happened without backbenchers.
We have this ludicrous notion of "conservatives" wanting their echo chamber so they can talk to themselves, agree with themselves and thus opinion is further polarised.
I think banning Trump from Twitter is wrong on so many levels - the problem with free speech isn't the freedom but the speech. Sites like this encourage plurality and diversity to a point but it seems some on both Right and Left would rather not engage with people with whom they disagree.
I can only surmise some find it impossible to accept either elements of their own position might be wrong or that elements of their opponent's position might be right. Why is it so many want not to be challenged and simply want their own belief systems re-enforced?
I suppose if you want to live a hedgehog life, curled up in your own belief systems and instinctively hostile to anyone who thinks differently, that's fine but that becomes a hugely limiting worldview.
The problem with objecting to banning Trump is that he seems to have pretty clearly and persistently breached their guidelines, and in the aftermath of what just occurred his words on there could well be dangerous. There are others around the globe who should be banned too, and the concerns around developing separate echo chambers and general issues of speech are not irrelevant, but simply ignoring the harm can cause and that to leave him on makes a mockery of their expressed rules of the platform is also problematic.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
I'm not putting him that bracket at all; rather, just listing a couple of obvious names of politicians who (along with Mandela, Thatcher, Obama, and others) are in a different universe of political success.
I'm very uneasy about free speech being policed by Amazon or other web hosting companies. If they host websites that are breaking the law by inciting violence then it's up to the police to bring a cease and desist order to have the website shut down.
I don't know if Parler is breaking the law, I know that Trump did by inciting a mob to overthrow the government so Twitter and the rest are more than justified to throw him of their platforms for doing so.
Auiu, under the current laws a social media network isn't a publisher and aren't responsible for what people post on their website. It shouldn't be the decision of private companies to say who is and isn't allowed a platform.
I think you have to draw a line at the appropriate point in the stack. Twitter banning Trump, or anyone else for whatever reason they like, seems fine to me. If you don't like it, use another website. I think they handled Trump just right: They let him speak as far as possible, to the point of stretching their TOS a little bit, put up warnings when he was telling big, dangerous lies, and finally banned him for incitement to violence.
Apple and Google banning Parler is creepy. They're within their rights to do it, but they have effective control over people's devices that's practically extremely hard to circumvent. There's a risk that we end up with something like the banking system, where people can be effectively be cut off by private businesses, but they're potentially being leaned on by politicians and other powerful people. This gives you the worst of both worlds: You have government action that's too wide to circumvent, but you have no redress, because it's technically being done by a private business that has the right not to serve you.
I'm not sure if there's a *regulatory* fix for this - more political involvement probably makes it worse - but we should definitely be promoting technical workarounds like getting comfortable with f-droid, getting Google services off your phone, not buying Apple stuff, building stuff with censorship-resistant protocols.
This is one of the cases where you have to imagine how you'd feel if the weapon was deployed against someone you like and not just scumbags like the Trumpists, because by the time that happens it will be too late to respond.
+1. It is an ominous and dangerous development. Wokeism, and the censorship or self-censorship that comes with it, is being driven by China and Russia on social media, so as to foment western division, and to make us abandon one of our key advantages: Free Speech
Harder for nasty ignorant people to reach a large audience with nasty ignorant shit.
Slight raising of the small risk that we sleepwalk into a dystopia where Californian supergeeks regulate what we can say.
Such is the cost/benefit on this one and the recent actions pass for me. Pass with flying colours. Scope for much more of this and I hope there is.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Your kidding, right? Without Nigel there would have been no Brexit. I mean I enjoy discussing with people about this because it is so transparently obvious that I can do something useful, such as ring my aged aunt at the same time as posting about it.
No I am not kidding. Backbenchers were more important than Farage.
Backbenchers were the reason Major struggled with Maastricht rebellions. Backbenchers were the reason Cameron was forced to concede the referendum, before UKIP took off in the polls. Backbenchers were the reason Theresa May failed to get her deal through.
Farage was a noisy bystander jumping on the bandwagon. If it wasn't for the backbenchers then May would have got her deal through, Cameron would never have needed to offer a referendum, Major would not have seen the party torn apart over Maastricht.
This could have happened with or without Farage. It couldn't have happened without backbenchers.
We have this ludicrous notion of "conservatives" wanting their echo chamber so they can talk to themselves, agree with themselves and thus opinion is further polarised.
I think banning Trump from Twitter is wrong on so many levels - the problem with free speech isn't the freedom but the speech. Sites like this encourage plurality and diversity to a point but it seems some on both Right and Left would rather not engage with people with whom they disagree.
I can only surmise some find it impossible to accept either elements of their own position might be wrong or that elements of their opponent's position might be right. Why is it so many want not to be challenged and simply want their own belief systems re-enforced?
I suppose if you want to live a hedgehog life, curled up in your own belief systems and instinctively hostile to anyone who thinks differently, that's fine but that becomes a hugely limiting worldview.
No, Trump being banned from Twitter makes a lot of sense. He invited a mob to try and overthrow the government. That's sedition and very much illegal. Parler being taken down by AWS for no specific reason other than Bezos not liking what is posted on there very much is a problem.
A very well written and argued article by Alastair, as is usual with his pieces. Unfortunately, it comes from the same mindset that dominates much of the discussion on here which is to ask, when deciding to condemn something or not, "who is doing it?" rather than "is the act wrong?".
First of all, Trump is not a wannabee dictator who dreams of gleaming jackboots marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. His mindset is of a CEO: he's conditioned to giving orders and having them obeyed. It's why business leaders make bad political leaders because they are unaccustomed to the checks and balances of political systems and why he gets mad at SC judges or political appointees not following his whims. But the idea he wants a fascist regime out of the pages of Gilead is fantasy doom-porn thinking on the part of the Democrats who need something to keep their coalition together. It wasn't sinister Government forces that led to a light Police presence at last week's demo, it was the Capitol Police assumed they would not be trouble, which (conversely) is why the National Guard were deployed for BLM rallies, which had a habit of ending in disturbances.
As for impeaching him or not, the reason for saying it would cause division is not the prosecution itself: if he has committed impeachable offences, he should be tried. It is because everyone knows it would be selective and based on targeting the individual involved rather than the act itself is worthy of impeachable. The same people on here who argue most vehemently that Trump is guilty of treason are the same ones who tie themselves in knots arguing why Democrat politicians encouraging BLM protests even given the violence. You want Trump charged with incitement? Sure go ahead. But I think Kamala Harris who said BLM protests should continue to the election, also was recklessly inciting violence, even though she covered her ass with the mealy mouthed "violence is never right". She is a political and ex-AG. She knew how her words about the protests would be interpreted.
And for all those lawyers on here who are so exercised about the constitutional damage Trump has caused, where's your outrage over Nancy Pelosi - who has absolutely no role in this under the US Constitution - calling the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss the nuclear chain of command? Everyone knows it was a stunt but it's a dangerous one. But who of the many on here who get so exercised about little action Trump does criticised something that potentially has very far-reaching consequences?
Read "Why Nations Fail". One of the key points in there for a nation's success or not is that everyone feels as though the rules and laws are fair and applied to all. If there is going to be anything that destroys trust democracy, it is going to be this selective picking of what is right or wrong.
That's a very long way of saying that the law should be applied equally to all.
Sorry, I don't mean to sound snarky. But that's what you are saying in essence. And you're right. The laws on incitement and violence etc should be applied equally to all. As should all other laws eg on the right to vote.
Part of the difficulty the US has is that this has not been happening. Blacks feel that their right to vote is being slowly salami-sliced away by the various voter suppression techniques being used. Or that their right to walk the streets freely without being constantly picked and questioned by the police is less than it should be. Other groups will have their own complaints.
And what makes this particularly toxic is that in some cases one group which feels ignored feels that it needs to do down another group to feel better about itself. This racist legacy was deliberately stoked by Trump.
If Trump broke laws he should be prosecuted. I understand all the arguments for "healing" but that seems like a pretext for avoiding accountability for one's actions. To have genuine healing there needs to be justice first.
Your last para is spot on. It's hard not to smile when Trump supporters now start saying we have to prioritise the "healing process".
It seems pretty clear that Trump has strongly fascist tendencies - one of the good reasons why he lost the popular vote numerically both in 2016 and 2020. What the term 'fascist' conceals is that certain attitudes common in the world embrace pretty much the same attributes and are just as bad. Terms like 'left' and 'right' don't help much here either; nor does the idea of ideology, for that implies something rational, thoughtful and long term.
Better maybe to look for the common attributes of bad politics wherever it comes from, such as
The use of political violence Suppression of dissent Distancing from the civil democratic process Use of scapegoating Indifference to succession planning Friends and allies who fit a particular pattern Use of 'the lie direct'
The list can be extended of course. The attention, rightly, on the USA should not disguise how everyday and frequent these attributes are in the world and how useless are terms like 'left' and 'right' when dealing with authoritarians, totalitarians, narcissists and psychopaths.
It's an outstanding article.
"Trump’s coup attempt of 2020-21, like other failed coup attempts, is a warning for those who care about the rule of law and a lesson for those who do not. His pre-fascism revealed a possibility for American politics. For a coup to work in 2024, the breakers will require something that Trump never quite had: an angry minority, organized for nationwide violence, ready to add intimidation to an election. Four years of amplifying a big lie just might get them this. To claim that the other side stole an election is to promise to steal one yourself."
A story which rather tellingly isn't being told in the right wing press. Various trade bodies who represent significant swathes of the economy saying the new rules are so unworkable that the government need to reopen negotiations. This quote from the CEO of Make UK is key:
"“There are customs experts with 30 years’ experience who are baffled by what the new regulations mean, let alone small- and medium-sized businesses who have never had to deal with the kind of paperwork that is now required. The great fear is that for many it will prove too much and they will simply choose not to export to the EU.”"
The government didn't understand how trade works and have ended up with a deal which they don't understand. Having soent years saying fuck business and branding warnings as Project Fear it'll be a painful revelation to find out that manufacturing and logistics experts actually did know what they were talking about after all.
This isn't just "apply the same paperwork as you would for anywhere else what's the problem?" as some parrots on here have re-squawked. This is a deal which does not work at a fundamental practical level for the supply chain of the UK.
Final observation. However bad this gets for the government, Labour will struggle to profit. As the omnishambles deal collapses and the stupidity of both it's structure and the details is laid bare, Labour attacks will be batted aside with a simple line. "You voted for it". Bravo Keith, bravo.
Hardly - the final vote was between leaving without a deal or leaving with a deal.
Both versions introduced whole piles of paperwork the only thing the deal avoided was tariffs on top of the paperwork.
Sadly politicians (and the general public) think it's tariffs that creates issues but as anyone who has exported things will know it's the paperwork that takes time and kills you.
The Tories have a majority of 80. The deal was going to pass regardless of whether the opposition gave their consent or not. So the vote was the deal with our agreement or the deal without the agreement.
An important lesson Labour didn't learn from the Coalition. The coalition did a lot of positive things and a whole pile of negative things. Tory bills backed by LibDem MPs are still hung around the neck of the LibDems years later. "You voted for it". This is the fate that Labour have chosen.
Or as was pointed out by others on here in December - if Labour had voted no the result was attacks that they never wanted us to Leave.
It really was a no win choice for Labour - but I did say continually that they should have just taken the day off and left the Tories to it.
Sadly because of the Covid announcements that wasn't an option.
I suggest that in a few years time 'You never wanted us to Leave' is going to be far less damaging than 'You voted for it".
It would be even better if in a few years no one is ever talking about Brexit again.
Yours, A former Remainer.
Does 'A former Remainer' = 'now a Rejoiner'?
No.
We all need to move on from Brexit. I'm done with it. It's over.
Listening to Starmer on Marr he rejects reintroducing free movement of Labour which of course would see the UK rejoining the single market and customs union, but he said he would want to improve on this 'thin' deal.
Marr pointed out that he had told the Daily Mirror he would bring back free movement of Labour and that his many supporters will be angered by his answer. He reiterated he would not bring free movement of Labour and it must follow that those who support closer ties or rejoining can only have one home and it is not Labour
Step forward the Lib Dems or SNP in Scotland
You need to move on , there is a deal. We know you are anti Labour in every regard , I think we all get it by now. Step forward with what ?
Actually you are quite wrong
I am reporting an exchange between Marr and Starmer and his refusal to reintroduce freedom of movement and to have closer ties with Europe
This is not anti Labour, this is where Starmer is and we all know there is a large cohort of Labour supporters who want closer ties or to rejoin the EU and Labour are not going to go there
Hence Lib Dems and SNP and Plaid are the home of those who desire EU membership
And Starmer is not at all a no go as Corbyn was and as of now I am open to persuasion by either of the main parties for my vote in 2024 subject to me keeping taking my pills and hopefully being vaccinated at sometime in the next few weeks
Starmer is sensibly making Labour a party Redwall voters can consider voting for again, leaving the diehard Remainers as you say to the LDs, Greens, SNP and Plaid
You seem to be suggesting that Scotland is now diehard remain. Fair play for accepting that.
It isn't, Yougov showed even most Scots wanted the Deal to pass.
45% of Scots only voted SNP in 2019, 55% did not
+9.5 lib dem, +1.0 green
Though the LDs are a Unionist party despite opposing the Brexit Deal
LDs are a Unionist party who see strength in unity - hence their support of the UK in the EU, and Scotland in the UK. It is entirely consistent.
To support Brexit because "sovereignty" and deny Scotland its independence is what is inconsistent.
I voted Remain and am also a Unionist, I just respect the Leave vote which occurred 46 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine 'once in a generation' referendum
The Good Friday Agreement allows for a plebiscite every 7 years.
So what, that is because of the specific circumstances of NI it does not apply to Scotland.
Even then it applies only if there is clear evidence to the NI Secretary there should be a border poll, which given Unionist parties in NI still get a higher combined voteshare than Nationalist parties there is not
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Your kidding, right? Without Nigel there would have been no Brexit. I mean I enjoy discussing with people about this because it is so transparently obvious that I can do something useful, such as ring my aged aunt at the same time as posting about it.
No I am not kidding. Backbenchers were more important than Farage.
Backbenchers were the reason Major struggled with Maastricht rebellions. Backbenchers were the reason Cameron was forced to concede the referendum, before UKIP took off in the polls. Backbenchers were the reason Theresa May failed to get her deal through.
Farage was a noisy bystander jumping on the bandwagon. If it wasn't for the backbenchers then May would have got her deal through, Cameron would never have needed to offer a referendum, Major would not have seen the party torn apart over Maastricht.
This could have happened with or without Farage. It couldn't have happened without backbenchers.
No Nigel no Brexit.
What did Bill Cash achieve? Fuck all.
Wrong.
Cash achieved Brexit.
No Farage and Brexit is still very much an issue because the MPs of the Governing party made it one.
No Tory Brexiteers and Farage is just a loudmouth pub bore.
It was Tory MPs that brought about Brexit, not Farage.
It seems pretty clear that Trump has strongly fascist tendencies - one of the good reasons why he lost the popular vote numerically both in 2016 and 2020. What the term 'fascist' conceals is that certain attitudes common in the world embrace pretty much the same attributes and are just as bad. Terms like 'left' and 'right' don't help much here either; nor does the idea of ideology, for that implies something rational, thoughtful and long term.
Better maybe to look for the common attributes of bad politics wherever it comes from, such as
The use of political violence Suppression of dissent Distancing from the civil democratic process Use of scapegoating Indifference to succession planning Friends and allies who fit a particular pattern Use of 'the lie direct'
The list can be extended of course. The attention, rightly, on the USA should not disguise how everyday and frequent these attributes are in the world and how useless are terms like 'left' and 'right' when dealing with authoritarians, totalitarians, narcissists and psychopaths.
But most of the real cunts are right wing.
Language, vicar, language....
Since ancient sitcoms that anyone under 30 hasn't heard of seem to be the plat du jour, 'Language, Timothy' surely?
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
Of course,
I notice the datestamp was 12/3/2020. is that 12th March or 3rd December?
I'm very uneasy about free speech being policed by Amazon or other web hosting companies. If they host websites that are breaking the law by inciting violence then it's up to the police to bring a cease and desist order to have the website shut down.
I don't know if Parler is breaking the law, I know that Trump did by inciting a mob to overthrow the government so Twitter and the rest are more than justified to throw him of their platforms for doing so.
Auiu, under the current laws a social media network isn't a publisher and aren't responsible for what people post on their website. It shouldn't be the decision of private companies to say who is and isn't allowed a platform.
I think you have to draw a line at the appropriate point in the stack. Twitter banning Trump, or anyone else for whatever reason they like, seems fine to me. If you don't like it, use another website. I think they handled Trump just right: They let him speak as far as possible, to the point of stretching their TOS a little bit, put up warnings when he was telling big, dangerous lies, and finally banned him for incitement to violence.
Apple and Google banning Parler is creepy. They're within their rights to do it, but they have effective control over people's devices that's practically extremely hard to circumvent. There's a risk that we end up with something like the banking system, where people can be effectively be cut off by private businesses, but they're potentially being leaned on by politicians and other powerful people. This gives you the worst of both worlds: You have government action that's too wide to circumvent, but you have no redress, because it's technically being done by a private business that has the right not to serve you.
I'm not sure if there's a *regulatory* fix for this - more political involvement probably makes it worse - but we should definitely be promoting technical workarounds like getting comfortable with f-droid, getting Google services off your phone, not buying Apple stuff, building stuff with censorship-resistant protocols.
This is one of the cases where you have to imagine how you'd feel if the weapon was deployed against someone you like and not just scumbags like the Trumpists, because by the time that happens it will be too late to respond.
+1. It is an ominous and dangerous development. Wokeism, and the censorship or self-censorship that comes with it, is being driven by China and Russia on social media, so as to foment western division, and to make us abandon one of our key advantages: Free Speech
Harder for nasty ignorant people to reach a large audience with nasty ignorant shit.
Slight raising of the small risk that we sleepwalk into a dystopia where Californian supergeeks regulate what we can say.
Such is the cost/benefit on this one and the recent actions pass for me. Pass with flying colours. Scope for much more of this and I hope there is.
Agreed. Some regulation of the tech giants is required such that an individual can challenge a ban in the courts. I'm not sure if that remedy is available currently or not.
Let's not forget that these platforms currently get a big pass on libel, hate crimes etc. It's a pass that the banks, for example, do not get on laundered money.
The right-wing bury-bad-news handbook 1. It was BLM, Antifa, Muslims, and leftists [0-2 hours] 2. It's too early to tell what really happened [2-24 hours] 3. It wasn't BLM, Antifa, Muslims, or leftists but they caused others to do it [1-3 days] 4. We should take the time to find out what really happened [3-21 days] (YOU ARE HERE) 5. What, you're still on about that? That was ages ago! [3 weeks-eternity]
Brilliant.
On the pseudonyms things, I don't really care who posts as what, since with a few exceptions I've never heard of anyone on PB outside PB (nor do I expect anyone much outside PB to have heard of me). They can call themselves something different every week if they like, though I don't see the point. XXX is really YYY? Oh well.
My impression with seanT was that as he actually is a well-known author he decided to go anonymous so he can post outrageous stuff without a public backlash, which seems pretty sensible.
Health Service Journal editor Alastair McLellan: “The region that I'm most worried about is the South West. Covid cases are up 33 per cent on a week ago and that rate of growth is nearly double what it was a week ago. The East of England region is also growing fast."
Telegraph
But from a very low base in the SW. Numbers per 100k still around 1/3rd of the UK average.
And the numbers got punted northwards by the arrival of an influx of Fulham Fuckers. Who hopefully have now kept a low profile and burnt out the Covid they brought with them because there is nowhere much to go and nothing much to do down here other than stay in and do jigsaws....
I spoke to someone who went to a testing station here in the East yesterday.
Staff frazzled and a lot more parents with children.
Also hearing of more and more people who we know catching it.
A friend of one of my son's rang him last night in tears - he caught it from work and has passed on to his entire family.
That includes a 12 year old and his step father who has been taken to ITU - not locally as that hospital is full (he already had underlying health issues around breathing so a very worrying time for them).
One positive is that another son tells me that in his locale they seem to at last be taking this a bit more seriously now (as cases locally stack up)
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
I'm not putting him that bracket at all; rather, just listing a couple of obvious names of politicians who (along with Mandela, Thatcher, Obama, and others) are in a different universe of political success.
Nigel wanted to leave the EU and he convinced the whole country to vote for it when most of them hadn't really thought about it too much.
No Nigel no Brexit.
If you don't think that is a huge political achievement then I really do wonder.
Health Service Journal editor Alastair McLellan: “The region that I'm most worried about is the South West. Covid cases are up 33 per cent on a week ago and that rate of growth is nearly double what it was a week ago. The East of England region is also growing fast."
Telegraph
So stop throwing those bloody invalids at us. I understand our hospitals are already rammed full of overflow lepers from Kent. All very good Samaritan, but where are we going to overflow to?
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
I don't think people will forget Trump. Maybe just send him to St Helena.
Too accessible now it has an airstrip.
Pitcairn.
Though I see that the 'capital' of Tristan de Cunha, Edinburgh of the Seven Seas,'is regarded as the most remote permanent settlement on Earth, being 2,173 kilometres (1,350 mi)[2] from the nearest other human settlement, on Saint Helena', so that'd make a good choice.
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
I don't think people will forget Trump. Maybe just send him to St Helena.
Too accessible now it has an airstrip.
Pitcairn.
If he comes to Prestwick, Nicola can exile him to Rockall.
A rock covered in seagull shit is just right for his new home.
We've got a few. There are still remains of the buildings used to imprison Covenanters on Bass Rock, Trump's Free Church Lewis ancestors may even approve of him joining the dissenting martyrs!
Is there a full and definitive list of the SeanT pseudonyms?
Byronic LadyG Eadric Leon
But from memory there was one which popped up for just a few posts between Byronic and Lady G.
Can we not do this? FFS, just let people have their pseudonyms.
I often spot "old" posters coming back with different handles but what I've never spotted is someone using multiple IDs at once.
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
A very well written and argued article by Alastair, as is usual with his pieces. Unfortunately, it comes from the same mindset that dominates much of the discussion on here which is to ask, when deciding to condemn something or not, "who is doing it?" rather than "is the act wrong?".
First of all, Trump is not a wannabee dictator who dreams of gleaming jackboots marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. His mindset is of a CEO: he's conditioned to giving orders and having them obeyed. It's why business leaders make bad political leaders because they are unaccustomed to the checks and balances of political systems and why he gets mad at SC judges or political appointees not following his whims. But the idea he wants a fascist regime out of the pages of Gilead is fantasy doom-porn thinking on the part of the Democrats who need something to keep their coalition together. It wasn't sinister Government forces that led to a light Police presence at last week's demo, it was the Capitol Police assumed they would not be trouble, which (conversely) is why the National Guard were deployed for BLM rallies, which had a habit of ending in disturbances.
As for impeaching him or not, the reason for saying it would cause division is not the prosecution itself: if he has committed impeachable offences, he should be tried. It is because everyone knows it would be selective and based on targeting the individual involved rather than the act itself is worthy of impeachable. The same people on here who argue most vehemently that Trump is guilty of treason are the same ones who tie themselves in knots arguing why Democrat politicians encouraging BLM protests even given the violence. You want Trump charged with incitement? Sure go ahead. But I think Kamala Harris who said BLM protests should continue to the election, also was recklessly inciting violence, even though she covered her ass with the mealy mouthed "violence is never right". She is a political and ex-AG. She knew how her words about the protests would be interpreted.
And for all those lawyers on here who are so exercised about the constitutional damage Trump has caused, where's your outrage over Nancy Pelosi - who has absolutely no role in this under the US Constitution - calling the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss the nuclear chain of command? Everyone knows it was a stunt but it's a dangerous one. But who of the many on here who get so exercised about little action Trump does criticised something that potentially has very far-reaching consequences?
Read "Why Nations Fail". One of the key points in there for a nation's success or not is that everyone feels as though the rules and laws are fair and applied to all. If there is going to be anything that destroys trust democracy, it is going to be this selective picking of what is right or wrong.
That's a very long way of saying that the law should be applied equally to all.
Sorry, I don't mean to sound snarky. But that's what you are saying in essence. And you're right. The laws on incitement and violence etc should be applied equally to all. As should all other laws eg on the right to vote.
Part of the difficulty the US has is that this has not been happening. Blacks feel that their right to vote is being slowly salami-sliced away by the various voter suppression techniques being used. Or that their right to walk the streets freely without being constantly picked and questioned by the police is less than it should be. Other groups will have their own complaints.
And what makes this particularly toxic is that in some cases one group which feels ignored feels that it needs to do down another group to feel better about itself. This racist legacy was deliberately stoked by Trump.
If Trump broke laws he should be prosecuted. I understand all the arguments for "healing" but that seems like a pretext for avoiding accountability for one's actions. To have genuine healing there needs to be justice first.
Your last para is spot on. It's hard not to smile when Trump supporters now start saying we have to prioritise the "healing process".
On the other hand 'to have genuine healing there needs to be justice first' is not what the South African truth and reconciliation process was about, nor the peace process in Northern Ireland.
I think it is 2m this week. I'd been told at the beginning of the week that the NHS was due supply of over 2m and that there was confidence that all of the doses could be used with the existing network which is build for between two and three million per week.
Assuming it's not a maths error from Hancock (which wouldn't surprise me) and we've hit 2m this week it should be a stepping stone to 4m per week by the end of January so that by the time we get to week 12 and second jabs there's almost 40m people who've had the first one and the remaining 15m first can be done alongside as second jabs ramp up and additional capacity can be added for a few weeks to get everyone a first jab by the end of May and fully immunised with two jabs by the end of August.
That timeframe seems to be what Hancock was referring when he said by autumn all adults would get it.
I reckon it was all down to Gordon Brittas and his hashtag he has been tweeting all week...that got it done.
This Gordon Brittas thing really isn’t working.
Too late. The Brittas connection has taken on a life of its own now.
You might as well try to get people to spell Kier's name correctly - it's just not happening
The Brittas Empire is almost 30 years old from its premiere. I vaguelly recall it, but I don't think it ever left as big an impact on the public consciousness as something like Blackadder or Yes Minister. I struggle to see it making inroads even among people who do remember it.
It went on several series too long. Once the creators left, the series if got ridiculous even by its own standards.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Your kidding, right? Without Nigel there would have been no Brexit. I mean I enjoy discussing with people about this because it is so transparently obvious that I can do something useful, such as ring my aged aunt at the same time as posting about it.
No I am not kidding. Backbenchers were more important than Farage.
Backbenchers were the reason Major struggled with Maastricht rebellions. Backbenchers were the reason Cameron was forced to concede the referendum, before UKIP took off in the polls. Backbenchers were the reason Theresa May failed to get her deal through.
Farage was a noisy bystander jumping on the bandwagon. If it wasn't for the backbenchers then May would have got her deal through, Cameron would never have needed to offer a referendum, Major would not have seen the party torn apart over Maastricht.
This could have happened with or without Farage. It couldn't have happened without backbenchers.
I agree with you there PT,
The cancer was and is within the backbenchers of the Tory Party. Sadly the big C gets us all in the end.
If Parler won't moderate accounts that post things like this, I don't see why AWS should be obligated to host them?
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
Is there a full and definitive list of the SeanT pseudonyms?
Byronic LadyG Eadric Leon
But from memory there was one which popped up for just a few posts between Byronic and Lady G.
Can we not do this? FFS, just let people have their pseudonyms.
I often spot "old" posters coming back with different handles but what I've never spotted is someone using multiple IDs at once.
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
Outing people as sockpuppets used to be a banning offence. Maybe it still is, and the SeanT hive mind is treated as an exception
Is there a full and definitive list of the SeanT pseudonyms?
Byronic LadyG Eadric Leon
But from memory there was one which popped up for just a few posts between Byronic and Lady G.
Can we not do this? FFS, just let people have their pseudonyms.
I often spot "old" posters coming back with different handles but what I've never spotted is someone using multiple IDs at once.
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
I'm old enough to remember when the PB powers that be said that it was impossible for posters to come back with new identities without them knowing about it, and such behaviour would be STAMPED ON VERY HARD.
Is there a full and definitive list of the SeanT pseudonyms?
Byronic LadyG Eadric Leon
But from memory there was one which popped up for just a few posts between Byronic and Lady G.
Can we not do this? FFS, just let people have their pseudonyms.
I often spot "old" posters coming back with different handles but what I've never spotted is someone using multiple IDs at once.
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
Just so long as you don't answer your own question.
Read most of this (vg) Header thinking it was Cyclefree and then it turns out to be Alastair Meeks. I'm losing it. What I'm not losing, though, is my facility to coin the right term for things. The one I've long used for Donald Trump - when I'm in a detached mood - is wannabe fascist and I'm sticking with this. This is what he has been - along with all the other things he undoubtedly is - ever since that ride down the golden escalator in 2015.
Thankfully he has not managed to drop the "w" qualifier and although one should not be complacent about it it's clear he never will. He's finished in politics now. This is the upside of the simultaneously frightening and shambolic events of last week. It was a complete mess of an affair. A very tittish coup. The real deal strongmen such as Putin and Xi would have been pissing themselves watching it on TV. "Oh Don, Don, Don. You crazy boy. Why didn't you get in touch?"
Eloquently put. And absolutely correct. Trump will leave office on Wednesday week as a spent, pathetic loser. A laughing stock.
Cheers thanks. Yes, you and I are the most confident on here about this, I think, that he's over as something serious in politics. I wish I was as confident he would see the inside of a jail cell but I have a feeling he won't.
Yeah, I agree that the balance of odds is against his jailing. But I’m confident he’ll wither rapidly as a force, and just become an increasingly pathetic joke: Sarah Palin is probably the nearest (but by no means precise) analogue.
Anyone remember her?
Of course,
I notice the datestamp was 12/3/2020. is that 12th March or 3rd December?
A very well written and argued article by Alastair, as is usual with his pieces. Unfortunately, it comes from the same mindset that dominates much of the discussion on here which is to ask, when deciding to condemn something or not, "who is doing it?" rather than "is the act wrong?".
First of all, Trump is not a wannabee dictator who dreams of gleaming jackboots marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. His mindset is of a CEO: he's conditioned to giving orders and having them obeyed. It's why business leaders make bad political leaders because they are unaccustomed to the checks and balances of political systems and why he gets mad at SC judges or political appointees not following his whims. But the idea he wants a fascist regime out of the pages of Gilead is fantasy doom-porn thinking on the part of the Democrats who need something to keep their coalition together. It wasn't sinister Government forces that led to a light Police presence at last week's demo, it was the Capitol Police assumed they would not be trouble, which (conversely) is why the National Guard were deployed for BLM rallies, which had a habit of ending in disturbances.
As for impeaching him or not, the reason for saying it would cause division is not the prosecution itself: if he has committed impeachable offences, he should be tried. It is because everyone knows it would be selective and based on targeting the individual involved rather than the act itself is worthy of impeachable. The same people on here who argue most vehemently that Trump is guilty of treason are the same ones who tie themselves in knots arguing why Democrat politicians encouraging BLM protests even given the violence. You want Trump charged with incitement? Sure go ahead. But I think Kamala Harris who said BLM protests should continue to the election, also was recklessly inciting violence, even though she covered her ass with the mealy mouthed "violence is never right". She is a political and ex-AG. She knew how her words about the protests would be interpreted.
And for all those lawyers on here who are so exercised about the constitutional damage Trump has caused, where's your outrage over Nancy Pelosi - who has absolutely no role in this under the US Constitution - calling the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss the nuclear chain of command? Everyone knows it was a stunt but it's a dangerous one. But who of the many on here who get so exercised about little action Trump does criticised something that potentially has very far-reaching consequences?
Read "Why Nations Fail". One of the key points in there for a nation's success or not is that everyone feels as though the rules and laws are fair and applied to all. If there is going to be anything that destroys trust democracy, it is going to be this selective picking of what is right or wrong.
That's a very long way of saying that the law should be applied equally to all.
Sorry, I don't mean to sound snarky. But that's what you are saying in essence. And you're right. The laws on incitement and violence etc should be applied equally to all. As should all other laws eg on the right to vote.
Part of the difficulty the US has is that this has not been happening. Blacks feel that their right to vote is being slowly salami-sliced away by the various voter suppression techniques being used. Or that their right to walk the streets freely without being constantly picked and questioned by the police is less than it should be. Other groups will have their own complaints.
And what makes this particularly toxic is that in some cases one group which feels ignored feels that it needs to do down another group to feel better about itself. This racist legacy was deliberately stoked by Trump.
If Trump broke laws he should be prosecuted. I understand all the arguments for "healing" but that seems like a pretext for avoiding accountability for one's actions. To have genuine healing there needs to be justice first.
Your last para is spot on. It's hard not to smile when Trump supporters now start saying we have to prioritise the "healing process".
Most obviously - for anyone who still thinks this was a pantomime protest where people got a bit carried away - it shows a group of guys in army gear and equipment entering as an organised squad.
But also - they are entering late. After the tussles with the police at the crowd barriers in the grounds, after the confrontations on the steps, after the protestors had forced their way into the building (leaving their more cautious companions outside to sing the anthem - from interviews it seems these are the ones with enough sense to realise that entering a government building might be career limiting. Some also seem to have been waiting for Trump or someone to arrive to tell them what they were to do).
These guys held back until the building had been breached, before they appeared. They didn't want to risk early arrest or worse, or waste their time if the protestors didn't get inside, nor to be filmed by the world's media. Maybe also they had equipment they didn't want to be standing around with, until it was needed.
Further - they don't appear in the videos that have emerged from inside. They aren't the ones posing for selfies or carrying off souvenirs; they aren't the ones smashing the place up or seen trying to force entry to the chambers. Where are these guys? With the exception of the one (dressed in black) seen with the police-issue zip cuffs, most of these guys manage to stay off camera.
It was a mistake not to arrest people as they came out of the building - for some of the more 'professional' ones may never be identified - unless they are dobbed in by people back home.
But I expect the story of what they were doing, or trying to do, inside will emerge, sooner or later.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
I rather miss SeanT and the way he used to excite us all with information about his fabulous earnings, advances, translation rights, film rights - the full monty. I imagine by now he's safely housed on a private island with a select coterie of fellow multimillionaires, far too busy to drop by here. There was a tantalising cameo appearance on election night, 2019, if memory serves, but after that nothing to alleviate the gathering gloom and the slowly ticking clock. So if you happen to be reading this, Sean, good on yer, mate. You're a legend. Maybe you always were.
Legends don't buy a Mini to drive around in....!
Depends on whether it was a proper mini or the new modern abortion. Legends drive old minis.
The R50-R57 BMW Minis have been a colossal commercial success. I wouldn’t be seen fucking dead in one but you can't argue with engineering and marketing acumen behind them.
The ADO15 Minis are iconic and charming but are fucking deathtraps and more than a bit rust prone. I wrote one off in the early 90s while pretending to be Paddy Hopkirk at the 1964 Monte Carlo Rally but I didn't care because it belonged to RAF Valley.
I have owned and loved a Mk6 Classic Mini and an F56 modern Mini. Yes I would have another classic Mini if one appeared, but as you say they are deathtraps and I would be afraid to drive one. A big crash in a modern car does make you lust for crumple zones and safety devices.
As for the F56, it was a bit (lot) of a bloater design-wise, is crippled by stupid BMW iDrive, and has surprisingly little space inside - the classic was roomier.
But the noise of that 3-pot petrol and the ludicrous way you could throw it too fast into a bend that tightened too much and it would just laugh it off. I'd have an F56 again. In fact my old one lives a couple of villages away. Perhaps the new owner wants to sell it back. Hmmmm
Most obviously - for anyone who still thinks this was a pantomime protest where people got a bit carried away - it shows a group of guys in army gear and equipment entering as an organised squad.
But also - they are entering late. After the tussles with the police at the crowd barriers in the grounds, after the confrontations on the steps, after the protestors had forced their way into the building (leaving their more cautious companions outside to sing the anthem - from interviews it seems these are the ones with enough sense to realise that entering a government building might be career limiting. Some also seem to have been waiting for Trump or someone to arrive to tell them what they were to do).
These guys held back until the building had been breached, before they appeared. They didn't want to risk early arrest or worse, or waste their time if the protestors didn't get inside, nor to be filmed by the world's media. Maybe also they had equipment they didn't want to be standing around with, until it was needed.
Further - they don't appear in the videos that have emerged from inside. They aren't the ones posing for selfies or carrying off souvenirs; they aren't the ones smashing the place up or seen trying to force entry to the chambers. Where are these guys? With the exception of the one (dressed in black) seen with the police-issue zip cuffs, most of these guys manage to stay off camera.
It was a mistake not to arrest people as they came out of the building - for some of the more 'professional' ones may never be identified - unless they are dobbed in by people back home.
But I expect the story of what they were doing, or trying to do, inside will emerge, sooner or later.
If we are dealing in facts and killer facts, if it wasn’t for the accidental/deliberate massive security failing that stitched Donald Trump up, it would never have happened.
If Parler won't moderate accounts that post things like this, I don't see why AWS should be obligated to host them?
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
But Twitter and Facebook do the same, almost no jihadi content is taken down on either. YouTube fought a court case to ensure they weren't responsible for taking down ISIS propaganda videos.
The law is the law, AWS is a monopoly provider and its service shouldn't be subject to the whims of an owner or management.
If Parler won't moderate accounts that post things like this, I don't see why AWS should be obligated to host them?
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
But Twitter and Facebook do the same, almost no jihadi content is taken down on either. YouTube fought a court case to ensure they weren't responsible for taking down ISIS propaganda videos.
The law is the law, AWS is a monopoly provider and its service shouldn't be subject to the whims of an owner or management.
Even more than that....they make it very clear they will do as much as possible to protect "privacy" and not cooperate with the authorities even in the case of terrorism.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
I'm not putting him that bracket at all; rather, just listing a couple of obvious names of politicians who (along with Mandela, Thatcher, Obama, and others) are in a different universe of political success.
Nigel wanted to leave the EU and he convinced the whole country to vote for it when most of them hadn't really thought about it too much.
No Nigel no Brexit.
If you don't think that is a huge political achievement then I really do wonder.
I think your take is wrong.
Farage was an influence, no doubt, and maybe the difference between 52/48 and 48/52 but so too: Johnson, Gove, Murdoch, Dacre and a host of others, over many years.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
Yes, there used to be a prevailing view on PB that pseudonyms, noms de plume, or - as they were inelegantly known here “multiple screen names” were some sort of grave crime. It was then, as it is now, an utterly pathetic attack.
I think it was Nick Palmer Ex MP who essentially nailed it when he asked: “Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?”
Which was a very good question I think.
In any case, Leon has improved in recent days. He is rather less boring and has thankfully rolled back somewhat on the doom pornography which was in danger of defining him.
Is Sean banned from the site? I always assumed Byronic was a pseudonym.
Sean asked for his posts to be deleted and has since appeared with pseudonym accounts that are usually easy to spot due to the poster's insane business...
Ironically, so did tim, believing that Sean had divulged his real-world identity, though Sean argued that it was already in the public domain. A pity, really, as some of their 'conversations' would make interesting reading after all this time.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
I rather miss SeanT and the way he used to excite us all with information about his fabulous earnings, advances, translation rights, film rights - the full monty. I imagine by now he's safely housed on a private island with a select coterie of fellow multimillionaires, far too busy to drop by here. There was a tantalising cameo appearance on election night, 2019, if memory serves, but after that nothing to alleviate the gathering gloom and the slowly ticking clock. So if you happen to be reading this, Sean, good on yer, mate. You're a legend. Maybe you always were.
Legends don't buy a Mini to drive around in....!
Depends on whether it was a proper mini or the new modern abortion. Legends drive old minis.
From memory its a modern Cooper S - so not even the full fat JCW version.
Oh that is sad. Sean wherever you are, you have lost some very crucial legend points there.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
I'm not putting him that bracket at all; rather, just listing a couple of obvious names of politicians who (along with Mandela, Thatcher, Obama, and others) are in a different universe of political success.
Nigel wanted to leave the EU and he convinced the whole country to vote for it when most of them hadn't really thought about it too much.
No Nigel no Brexit.
If you don't think that is a huge political achievement then I really do wonder.
I think your take is wrong.
Farage was an influence, no doubt, and maybe the difference between 52/48 and 48/52 but so too: Johnson, Gove, Murdoch, Dacre and a host of others, over many years.
If Parler won't moderate accounts that post things like this, I don't see why AWS should be obligated to host them?
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
Do people think revolutionary Jihadists should be free to post on twitter? Once it gets to a violent revolutionary movement things change. Trump crossed that line and took his supporters with him.
The right-wing bury-bad-news handbook 1. It was BLM, Antifa, Muslims, and leftists [0-2 hours] 2. It's too early to tell what really happened [2-24 hours] 3. It wasn't BLM, Antifa, Muslims, or leftists but they caused others to do it [1-3 days] 4. We should take the time to find out what really happened [3-21 days] (YOU ARE HERE) 5. What, you're still on about that? That was ages ago! [3 weeks-eternity]
Brilliant.
On the pseudonyms things, I don't really care who posts as what, since with a few exceptions I've never heard of anyone on PB outside PB (nor do I expect anyone much outside PB to have heard of me). They can call themselves something different every week if they like, though I don't see the point. XXX is really YYY? Oh well.
My impression with seanT was that as he actually is a well-known author he decided to go anonymous so he can post outrageous stuff without a public backlash, which seems pretty sensible.
"On the pseudonyms things, I don't really care who posts as what, since with a few exceptions I've never heard of anyone on PB outside PB (nor do I expect anyone much outside PB to have heard of me). They can call themselves something different every week if they like, though I don't see the point. XXX is really YYY? Oh well. "
If ever there were an example of action speaking louder than words, Nick's reply here was it!
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Nah Topping is absolutely right on this. Brexit simply wouldn't have happened without Farage banging away about it for years. He forced the Tories into a position where they had to finally address the issue once and for all. Boris may have got it over the line but he wouldn't have even been in the game were it not for Farage.
If Parler won't moderate accounts that post things like this, I don't see why AWS should be obligated to host them?
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
But Twitter and Facebook do the same, almost no jihadi content is taken down on either. YouTube fought a court case to ensure they weren't responsible for taking down ISIS propaganda videos.
The law is the law, AWS is a monopoly provider and its service shouldn't be subject to the whims of an owner or management.
AWS isn't a monopoly provider as in theory you still have google, IBM, Microsoft and Digital Ocean / Linode.
In reality it is but that's for technical debt reasons which isn't something a monopoly enquiry will look into.
He was such a wise man it would take a fool not to learn from him. Also very good in bed, I understand.
If the various identities do indeed emanate from one poster - I`m not alleging that they do - then I have no problem with this. It`s quite fun.
I miss Byronic`s and Lady G`s posts. Especially the latter, from whom a gleaned two or three excellent travel tips. One for the coast north east of Athens and another in the Canaries.
I rather miss SeanT and the way he used to excite us all with information about his fabulous earnings, advances, translation rights, film rights - the full monty. I imagine by now he's safely housed on a private island with a select coterie of fellow multimillionaires, far too busy to drop by here. There was a tantalising cameo appearance on election night, 2019, if memory serves, but after that nothing to alleviate the gathering gloom and the slowly ticking clock. So if you happen to be reading this, Sean, good on yer, mate. You're a legend. Maybe you always were.
Legends don't buy a Mini to drive around in....!
Depends on whether it was a proper mini or the new modern abortion. Legends drive old minis.
From memory its a modern Cooper S - so not even the full fat JCW version.
Oh that is sad. Sean wherever you are, you have lost some very crucial legend points there.
I should point out I do have a full fat F56 JCW mini with all the trimmings (the person who specced it added every option to it). I will agree that the car is smaller inside than you would think but it's a go-cart on country lanes..
Is there a full and definitive list of the SeanT pseudonyms?
Byronic LadyG Eadric Leon
But from memory there was one which popped up for just a few posts between Byronic and Lady G.
Can we not do this? FFS, just let people have their pseudonyms.
I often spot "old" posters coming back with different handles but what I've never spotted is someone using multiple IDs at once.
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
I'm old enough to remember when the PB powers that be said that it was impossible for posters to come back with new identities without them knowing about it, and such behaviour would be STAMPED ON VERY HARD.
I'm old enough to remember getting banned a dozen times for noticing!
If Parler won't moderate accounts that post things like this, I don't see why AWS should be obligated to host them?
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
But Twitter and Facebook do the same, almost no jihadi content is taken down on either. YouTube fought a court case to ensure they weren't responsible for taking down ISIS propaganda videos.
The law is the law, AWS is a monopoly provider and its service shouldn't be subject to the whims of an owner or management.
Even more than that....they make it very clear they will do as much as possible to protect "privacy" and not cooperate with the authorities even in the case of terrorism.
They are picking and choosing, while espousing moral superiority.
At some level these tech cos will be making a commercial decision - they will be mindful of big corporates deserting them if they are associated with a coup attempt.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
I'm not putting him that bracket at all; rather, just listing a couple of obvious names of politicians who (along with Mandela, Thatcher, Obama, and others) are in a different universe of political success.
Nigel wanted to leave the EU and he convinced the whole country to vote for it when most of them hadn't really thought about it too much.
No Nigel no Brexit.
If you don't think that is a huge political achievement then I really do wonder.
I think your take is wrong.
Farage was an influence, no doubt, and maybe the difference between 52/48 and 48/52 but so too: Johnson, Gove, Murdoch, Dacre and a host of others, over many years.
Yes, they know who they are...
And hopefully are proud of what they have helped to achieve. I know I am.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
Yep. I'm afraid he's a legend and deservedly so. And in fact, despite the political chasm, I used to quite respect him myself. This changed when he disappeared up the Big Orange's fundament, occasionally emerging for breath and to hassle migrants. Really neither like nor respect him now. Boo.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Nah Topping is absolutely right on this. Brexit simply wouldn't have happened without Farage banging away about it for years. He forced the Tories into a position where they had to finally address the issue once and for all. Boris may have got it over the line but he wouldn't have even been in the game were it not for Farage.
Yes, Boris wouldn't have even been forced to decide whether he wanted to back Leave or Remain if it weren't for Farage!
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Nah Topping is absolutely right on this. Brexit simply wouldn't have happened without Farage banging away about it for years. He forced the Tories into a position where they had to finally address the issue once and for all. Boris may have got it over the line but he wouldn't have even been in the game were it not for Farage.
If Farage was banging away in isolation that would be fair enough.
But that completely ignores the Tory backbenchers who themselves were also banging away about it for years too.
Cameron didn't agree the referendum due to UKIP surging in the polls or winning the EP elections, he did so after around a hundred of his own MPs voted for one.
There was a crucial element within the Tory Party that were unhappy, just like there was in Labour in the seventies. Farage fed off that but he didn't do anything in a vacuum.
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Of course this is to a large extent in the eye of the beholder and subject to the criteria you choose but I would suggest Angela Merkel and Tony Blair as obviously far more successful.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
Well again, to put him into the Merkel and Blair bucket is slightly making my point isn't it?
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
Yep. I'm afraid he's a legend and deservedly so. And in fact, despite the political chasm, I used to quite respect him myself. This changed when he disappeared up the Big Orange's fundament, occasionally emerging for breath and to hassle migrants. Really neither like nor respect him now. Boo.
Is there a full and definitive list of the SeanT pseudonyms?
Byronic LadyG Eadric Leon
But from memory there was one which popped up for just a few posts between Byronic and Lady G.
Can we not do this? FFS, just let people have their pseudonyms.
I often spot "old" posters coming back with different handles but what I've never spotted is someone using multiple IDs at once.
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
Just so long as you don't answer your own question.
- I'm a bit cold, Ben. Can you put the heating on please next time you go downstairs?
Anyone know whether Farage has unequivocally condemned the Capitol outrage yet? It seems to be becoming more apparent by the day that describing Trump as a fascist is not hyperbole. His friend, supporter and fellow admirer of Putin deserved the epithet just as much.
You´d hope for a bit more than a statement of the blindingly obvious. Sadly for Farage- but hilariously for the rest of us- his meal ticket from the US far-right rubber chicken lecture circuit has just gone up in smoke. As for UK politics? A discount Enoch Powell without the after-life in Northern Ireland. Within a year or two, Nigel Who?
And yet he achieved one of the greatest changes in the political landscape of the UK in the last 70 years. The idea he will be forgotten - for better or worse - is laughable.
When I said that he was one of the most successful politicians of the past 50 years the only candidates people put up to show this wasn't so were, as I recall, Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Barack Obama.
Boris Johnson.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
Nah Topping is absolutely right on this. Brexit simply wouldn't have happened without Farage banging away about it for years. He forced the Tories into a position where they had to finally address the issue once and for all. Boris may have got it over the line but he wouldn't have even been in the game were it not for Farage.
Yes, Boris wouldn't have even been forced to decide whether he wanted to back Leave or Remain if it weren't for Farage!
Yes he would.
Cameron agreed to the referendum because his own MPs were demanding it and be couldn't control his own party. That was the case with or without Farage.
Comments
Viewing a country as your personal property and yourself as its embodiment.
Contempt for democracy and judicial independence. Opponents = Enemies.
Fetishization of the Nation and its superiority over others - who are to be "beaten".
Elevation of the true blood "real" people over minorities and incomers.
Leather.
Even Steve Baker had a bigger impact in the last couple of years.
"Don't argue with idiots. They'll bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
This para in particular nails it:
Post-truth is pre-fascism, and Trump has been our post-truth president. When we give up on truth, we concede power to those with the wealth and charisma to create spectacle in its place. Without agreement about some basic facts, citizens cannot form the civil society that would allow them to defend themselves. If we lose the institutions that produce facts that are pertinent to us, then we tend to wallow in attractive abstractions and fictions. Truth defends itself particularly poorly when there is not very much of it around, and the era of Trump — like the era of Vladimir Putin in Russia — is one of the decline of local news. Social media is no substitute: It supercharges the mental habits by which we seek emotional stimulation and comfort, which means losing the distinction between what feels true and what actually is true.
One of the problems with Brexit is that it is based on various lies, and indeed those lies must be perpetuated by a government which flirts with “post-truth”.
“There’s no border in the Irish Sea”
“We will prosper mightily”
“The deal guarantees free and frictionless trade”
Etc.
Many, many others would also knock Farage well down the list in my opinion (every PM has been 'more successful' imo).
Farage will be remembered for one thing only; the success of that one thing might age well, or might not.
It's incompetence and stupidity with a wafer-thin veneer of bullshit as an afterthought, rather than a fascist masterplan.
On disinformation etc, this will be hard to fight. Mainstream media can help themselves by being more objective. They won't, by and large.
You'd probably also accept the UK of 2020 was very different from the UK in 1975. Perhaps the divergence was always there and by 2016 the tie had become so strained it snapped.
The question now is whether the divergence will continue or whether a new convergence will occur.
These things happen - in 2010, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats converged to such an extent they were able to form a Coalition Government. Presumably, you supported it then as I did but the divergences since then make a similar prospect inconceivable.
The rate of change obviates against grandiose "once in a generation" statements. I would argue the relationship between the UK and EU will evolve in the next decade and it may well be revisiting the question of the relationship and whether that has reached the point when negotiations to consider re-joining the EU might begin will come to the fore sooner than in 20-30 years. After all, it took us 15 years to join the first time.
Clearly, re-joining the EU, were that to mean adopting the Euro and Schengen, would be wholly unacceptable at this time but a new trading relationship bringing us closer to the EU wouldn't need a new referendum were a Party advocating such a course to win a General Election.
Even that achievement only makes him a second-rate Screaming Lord Sutch.
Edit: Third-rate. I'd forgotten about Lt Cdr. William Boaks, RN (Retd.)
Pitcairn.
Though I see that the 'capital' of Tristan de Cunha, Edinburgh of the Seven Seas,'is regarded as the most remote permanent settlement on Earth, being 2,173 kilometres (1,350 mi)[2] from the nearest other human settlement, on Saint Helena', so that'd make a good choice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_of_the_Seven_Seas
And whether Brexit is a success or failure doesn't change the fact that Farage brought it about.
The ADO15 Minis are iconic and charming but are fucking deathtraps and more than a bit rust prone. I wrote one off in the early 90s while pretending to be Paddy Hopkirk at the 1964 Monte Carlo Rally but I didn't care because it belonged to RAF Valley.
These reformed bands are never as successful second time round.
Either the lead singer has lost his floppy boyish good looks and the remaining band members are flabby with royalty checks.
Or the new band members don't have the brio and panache of the originals.
Because once the magic has gone ... it has really gone.
1. Expect the emergency broadcast system to be activated. The FCC just recently released a memorandum speaking to the requirements under Federal law to send messages from the president to the public. See this link
2. Expect confusion. We are in a battle for our republic against elites that are attempting the very coup that they are accusing Trump of doing. In battle, there will be disinformation but know that plans are being fulfilled.
3. Expect high profile arrests to take place over the next 12 days and at any time. You may wake one morning to find someone in high office is no longer there.
4. Expect this to be a bumpy ride to the very end. This is not a television show where things are resolved in 45 minutes.
5. Expect more bombshell evidence to be released between now and Jan. 20th.
6. Expect some sort of internet blackout or outage: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Gmail are likely going to be affected. If you don’t have alternate forms of communication established now, it would be a good idea to start forming them even if it’s just checking on your nextdoor neighbors.
7. Expect Trump to be inaugurated on Jan 20th!
8. Expect the executive order from 2018 and/or the Insurrection Act to be enacted. This DOES NOT mean martial law. Remember that we have been under a state of emergency since 2018 which gives the president many powers to act.
A rock covered in seagull shit is just right for his new home.
I think banning Trump from Twitter is wrong on so many levels - the problem with free speech isn't the freedom but the speech. Sites like this encourage plurality and diversity to a point but it seems some on both Right and Left would rather not engage with people with whom they disagree.
I can only surmise some find it impossible to accept either elements of their own position might be wrong or that elements of their opponent's position might be right. Why is it so many want not to be challenged and simply want their own belief systems re-enforced?
I suppose if you want to live a hedgehog life, curled up in your own belief systems and instinctively hostile to anyone who thinks differently, that's fine but that becomes a hugely limiting worldview.
Backbenchers were the reason Major struggled with Maastricht rebellions.
Backbenchers were the reason Cameron was forced to concede the referendum, before UKIP took off in the polls.
Backbenchers were the reason Theresa May failed to get her deal through.
Farage was a noisy bystander jumping on the bandwagon. If it wasn't for the backbenchers then May would have got her deal through, Cameron would never have needed to offer a referendum, Major would not have seen the party torn apart over Maastricht.
This could have happened with or without Farage. It couldn't have happened without backbenchers.
I am not a big fan of Mark Drakeford, were I to stand outside the Sennedd and incite a bunch of people even less enthused by Drakeford than I am, and they were armed with cable ties, ropes and assorted weaponry to enter the building, it would not look good. If they then entered the chamber with malice aforethought and damaged property, but were thwarted from taking matters further I would be looking at a growing charge sheet. If, sadly in securing the Senedd a South Wales Police Officer and three protestors were killed I would be in Butetown Police Station awaiting my Magistrates appearance prior to being remanded for Crown Court later.
What did Bill Cash achieve? Fuck all.
Slight raising of the small risk that we sleepwalk into a dystopia where Californian supergeeks regulate what we can say.
Such is the cost/benefit on this one and the recent actions pass for me. Pass with flying colours. Scope for much more of this and I hope there is.
"Trump’s coup attempt of 2020-21, like other failed coup attempts, is a warning for those who care about the rule of law and a lesson for those who do not. His pre-fascism revealed a possibility for American politics. For a coup to work in 2024, the breakers will require something that Trump never quite had: an angry minority, organized for nationwide violence, ready to add intimidation to an election. Four years of amplifying a big lie just might get them this. To claim that the other side stole an election is to promise to steal one yourself."
Even then it applies only if there is clear evidence to the NI Secretary there should be a border poll, which given Unionist parties in NI still get a higher combined voteshare than Nationalist parties there is not
Cash achieved Brexit.
No Farage and Brexit is still very much an issue because the MPs of the Governing party made it one.
No Tory Brexiteers and Farage is just a loudmouth pub bore.
It was Tory MPs that brought about Brexit, not Farage.
Let's not forget that these platforms currently get a big pass on libel, hate crimes etc. It's a pass that the banks, for example, do not get on laundered money.
On the pseudonyms things, I don't really care who posts as what, since with a few exceptions I've never heard of anyone on PB outside PB (nor do I expect anyone much outside PB to have heard of me). They can call themselves something different every week if they like, though I don't see the point. XXX is really YYY? Oh well.
My impression with seanT was that as he actually is a well-known author he decided to go anonymous so he can post outrageous stuff without a public backlash, which seems pretty sensible.
Staff frazzled and a lot more parents with children.
Also hearing of more and more people who we know catching it.
A friend of one of my son's rang him last night in tears - he caught it from work and has passed on to his entire family.
That includes a 12 year old and his step father who has been taken to ITU - not locally as that hospital is full (he already had underlying health issues around breathing so a very worrying time for them).
One positive is that another son tells me that in his locale they seem to at last be taking this a bit more seriously now (as cases locally stack up)
No Nigel no Brexit.
If you don't think that is a huge political achievement then I really do wonder.
Yep. We're in the Capitol! USA! USA!
Now what?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_points_of_Earth#Remoteness
https://twitter.com/parlertakes/status/1348187803692138496
So my assumption is that (assuming same ISP address) you can close your account and come back with a new name but you CAN'T run multiple IDs concurrently. Is this right? Or can you, like, have multiple IDs if you just link to different email addresses?
Asking only from curiosity, not as prep for messing around myself. I wouldn't do that. Life's too short.
The cancer was and is within the backbenchers of the Tory Party. Sadly the big C gets us all in the end.
Parler's entire business model seems to have become hosting extremists and violence that aren't tolerated elsewhere, seems reasonable to me for AWS in a free market to say they want nothing to do with that.
Most obviously - for anyone who still thinks this was a pantomime protest where people got a bit carried away - it shows a group of guys in army gear and equipment entering as an organised squad.
But also - they are entering late. After the tussles with the police at the crowd barriers in the grounds, after the confrontations on the steps, after the protestors had forced their way into the building (leaving their more cautious companions outside to sing the anthem - from interviews it seems these are the ones with enough sense to realise that entering a government building might be career limiting. Some also seem to have been waiting for Trump or someone to arrive to tell them what they were to do).
These guys held back until the building had been breached, before they appeared. They didn't want to risk early arrest or worse, or waste their time if the protestors didn't get inside, nor to be filmed by the world's media. Maybe also they had equipment they didn't want to be standing around with, until it was needed.
Further - they don't appear in the videos that have emerged from inside. They aren't the ones posing for selfies or carrying off souvenirs; they aren't the ones smashing the place up or seen trying to force entry to the chambers. Where are these guys? With the exception of the one (dressed in black) seen with the police-issue zip cuffs, most of these guys manage to stay off camera.
It was a mistake not to arrest people as they came out of the building - for some of the more 'professional' ones may never be identified - unless they are dobbed in by people back home.
But I expect the story of what they were doing, or trying to do, inside will emerge, sooner or later.
As for the F56, it was a bit (lot) of a bloater design-wise, is crippled by stupid BMW iDrive, and has surprisingly little space inside - the classic was roomier.
But the noise of that 3-pot petrol and the ludicrous way you could throw it too fast into a bend that tightened too much and it would just laugh it off. I'd have an F56 again. In fact my old one lives a couple of villages away. Perhaps the new owner wants to sell it back. Hmmmm
The law is the law, AWS is a monopoly provider and its service shouldn't be subject to the whims of an owner or management.
"Just some half baked catch phrases"
If only he knew how many people have built successful careers (and businesses) out of half baked catch phrases he wouldn't be quite so dismissive
Yeah, neglected to mention (I forgot) that McLaren returns to Mercedes engines. Should be a net gain, I think.
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/29/apple-vs-fbi-all-you-need-to-know.html
They are picking and choosing, while espousing moral superiority.
Farage was an influence, no doubt, and maybe the difference between 52/48 and 48/52 but so too: Johnson, Gove, Murdoch, Dacre and a host of others, over many years.
If ever there were an example of action speaking louder than words, Nick's reply here was it!
In reality it is but that's for technical debt reasons which isn't something a monopoly enquiry will look into.
But that completely ignores the Tory backbenchers who themselves were also banging away about it for years too.
Cameron didn't agree the referendum due to UKIP surging in the polls or winning the EP elections, he did so after around a hundred of his own MPs voted for one.
There was a crucial element within the Tory Party that were unhappy, just like there was in Labour in the seventies. Farage fed off that but he didn't do anything in a vacuum.
https://twitter.com/guy_stallard/status/1347998887127212035?s=21
Cameron agreed to the referendum because his own MPs were demanding it and be couldn't control his own party. That was the case with or without Farage.