I heard a terrible statistic on NPR yesterday. During the 30 day trial of Chauvin, 60 people of colour, of both sexes, from the age of 13 up, where killed by the police across the US.
A lot of things need to change, yesterday.
It's rare these things arent entirely justified.
You and I have very different definitions of the word entirely. Or the word rare.
Further, some ambassadors warned that a lawsuit would further diminish citizens’ trust in the vaccine because it would sully the image of AstraZeneca, according to the diplomat. In "emotional terms," the diplomat said the Commission understandably wants to hit back at the vaccine producer over the delivery shortfalls — but added that the company is also needed in the global response against COVID-19.
What I'm hearing is that it is largely performative, for the reason that AZ doing much better than they did was impossible - and many Force Majeure factors blocking it.
I call that the EuCo needing to maintain an arsecovering narrative for UVDL and cronies.
In about 4 months EU Citizens will be asking "why did we continue dying after it had stopped in comparable countries", and EuCo will try to blame Az, UK, US, "vaccine nationalism", and then EU-27 health systems rolling out too slowly and places like Belgium and France unlocking too quickly.
EU politics for you. Anybody Else But Me.
The basic responsibility is of course the wrong people doing the job, making the wrong decisions last year. They need a very big smokescreen.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
If someone wants to call me a murderer because I eat meat then that is offensive.
And, they won't stop until no-one can eat meat - and it's illegal.
A line of defence needs to be thrown up now, before they advance any further.
Just the same as any other religion, which is what it is to some people.
Any time anyone wants to shove their religion down the throat of others - whether it be veganism or Christianity, Islam or whatever else you choose - religions like that need to be fought against.
Fundamentally, climate change is driven by us burning billions of tons of fossil fuels every year - humans have eaten meat and fish in modest numbers since the dawn of time.
If the Conservatives go down that road they will open up a huge flank on their right, which I will look at voting for with interest.
FWIW I was recently promoted at work and after my stellar success in ensuring the firm I work was ready for Brexit I've also been handed the job of Indyref2 preparations. I worked on the 2014 preparations but didn't manage it but I suspect this one will be even more complicated.
My plan to name it Project Unicorn, after Scotland's national animal, was denied (we already have a Project Unicorn).
But spare a thought for those people who work at the RBS Natwest Group and LBG/HBOS whose job is even more complicated.
That's interesting Eagles. What's your view on whether there will be a mass move south on Independence? And how will it be analagous or otherwise to Brexit? If companies do move south, where will they go? You have a golden opportunity to move the Edinburgh finance industry to Sheffield!
As Max has said Brexit didn't change our lender of last resort, Scottish independence does.
Some of the more militant Nats have said they will default on their portion of the UK debt if they don't get a good deal (whilst the UK Government have told the markets they will honour all the debts, even if Scotland doesn't).
That talk from Scotland will not reassure the markets.
This means hardly anyone will lend to an independent Scot because of their default, so there's no mechanism for a Scotland to bailout or support any company, they'd struggle to bailout a chippy with a grand's worth of debt.
So essentially money, jobs and people move south (or elsewhere), in probably that order of significance?
I suspect it'll be registered HQs and companies numbers to England first*, then money, and people.
*Companies House will have 'fun' with this as people try and ditch company numbers beginning with SC.
The commercial property market in Berwick upon Tweed will suddenly be looking very hot...
And it is on the East Coast Mainline as well.
Best not to buy anything north of the river, just in case.
Berwick is north of the river!
Indeed - Tweedmouth is on the south bank of the river
Both sides of the water would be the DMZ under HYUFD.
Not really as the border is 2.5 miles north of Berwick
Mind you it has been a garrison town for centuries
Not any more, to be precise. Barracks have been a couple of museums for some time (maybe 3 actually).
Yes but @HYUFD would have them restored to full garrison status
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
I suppose we should take comfort in the fact that most vegans don't stay that way, and many only do so part-time.
I remember the widespread relief when New Labour announced its ethical foreign policy, early in its first term.
Yet it wasn’t that long before the very same politicians (cook honourably excepted) were laying waste to the Middle East on the basis of false, fabricated evidence.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
FWIW I was recently promoted at work and after my stellar success in ensuring the firm I work was ready for Brexit I've also been handed the job of Indyref2 preparations. I worked on the 2014 preparations but didn't manage it but I suspect this one will be even more complicated.
My plan to name it Project Unicorn, after Scotland's national animal, was denied (we already have a Project Unicorn).
But spare a thought for those people who work at the RBS Natwest Group and LBG/HBOS whose job is even more complicated.
That's interesting Eagles. What's your view on whether there will be a mass move south on Independence? And how will it be analagous or otherwise to Brexit? If companies do move south, where will they go? You have a golden opportunity to move the Edinburgh finance industry to Sheffield!
As Max has said Brexit didn't change our lender of last resort, Scottish independence does.
Some of the more militant Nats have said they will default on their portion of the UK debt if they don't get a good deal (whilst the UK Government have told the markets they will honour all the debts, even if Scotland doesn't).
That talk from Scotland will not reassure the markets.
This means hardly anyone will lend to an independent Scot because of their default, so there's no mechanism for a Scotland to bailout or support any company, they'd struggle to bailout a chippy with a grand's worth of debt.
So essentially money, jobs and people move south (or elsewhere), in probably that order of significance?
I suspect it'll be registered HQs and companies numbers to England first*, then money, and people.
*Companies House will have 'fun' with this as people try and ditch company numbers beginning with SC.
The commercial property market in Berwick upon Tweed will suddenly be looking very hot...
And it is on the East Coast Mainline as well.
Best not to buy anything north of the river, just in case.
Berwick is north of the river!
Indeed - Tweedmouth is on the south bank of the river
Both sides of the water would be the DMZ under HYUFD.
Not really as the border is 2.5 miles north of Berwick
Mind you it has been a garrison town for centuries
Not any more, to be precise. Barracks have been a couple of museums for some time (maybe 3 actually).
Yes but @HYUFD would have them restored to full garrison status
On a historical side note, it's actually a rather interesting building - one of the first purpose built barracks in the (then very new) UK. The gym is now a modern art centre, too.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
If someone wants to call me a murderer because I eat meat then that is offensive.
And, they won't stop until no-one can eat meat - and it's illegal.
A line of defence needs to be thrown up now, before they advance any further.
Just the same as any other religion, which is what it is to some people.
Any time anyone wants to shove their religion down the throat of others - whether it be veganism or Christianity, Islam or whatever else you choose - religions like that need to be fought against.
Fundamentally, climate change is driven by us burning billions of tons of fossil fuels every year - humans have eaten meat and fish in modest numbers since the dawn of time.
If the Conservatives go down that road they will open up a huge flank on their right, which I will look at voting for with interest.
Indeed this is what I was saying last night - the answer to climate change is replacing dirty fuels with clean technology.
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
I’m guessing you’ve never been active in local politics and never actually knocked on the doors of people with flags in their garden?
I've done that in suburban Northwest. Never had an issue with it.
Perfectly normal people.
Suggesting everyone with a flag is a racist is as idiotic and discriminatory as saying everyone with a hijab is a terrorist.
Of course it is.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
If someone wants to call me a murderer because I eat meat then that is offensive.
And, they won't stop until no-one can eat meat - and it's illegal.
A line of defence needs to be thrown up now, before they advance any further.
Just the same as any other religion, which is what it is to some people.
Any time anyone wants to shove their religion down the throat of others - whether it be veganism or Christianity, Islam or whatever else you choose - religions like that need to be fought against.
Fundamentally, climate change is driven by us burning billions of tons of fossil fuels every year - humans have eaten meat and fish in modest numbers since the dawn of time.
If the Conservatives go down that road they will open up a huge flank on their right, which I will look at voting for with interest.
Indeed this is what I was saying last night - the answer to climate change is replacing dirty fuels with clean technology.
FWIW I was recently promoted at work and after my stellar success in ensuring the firm I work was ready for Brexit I've also been handed the job of Indyref2 preparations. I worked on the 2014 preparations but didn't manage it but I suspect this one will be even more complicated.
My plan to name it Project Unicorn, after Scotland's national animal, was denied (we already have a Project Unicorn).
But spare a thought for those people who work at the RBS Natwest Group and LBG/HBOS whose job is even more complicated.
That's interesting Eagles. What's your view on whether there will be a mass move south on Independence? And how will it be analagous or otherwise to Brexit? If companies do move south, where will they go? You have a golden opportunity to move the Edinburgh finance industry to Sheffield!
As Max has said Brexit didn't change our lender of last resort, Scottish independence does.
Some of the more militant Nats have said they will default on their portion of the UK debt if they don't get a good deal (whilst the UK Government have told the markets they will honour all the debts, even if Scotland doesn't).
That talk from Scotland will not reassure the markets.
This means hardly anyone will lend to an independent Scot because of their default, so there's no mechanism for a Scotland to bailout or support any company, they'd struggle to bailout a chippy with a grand's worth of debt.
So essentially money, jobs and people move south (or elsewhere), in probably that order of significance?
I suspect it'll be registered HQs and companies numbers to England first*, then money, and people.
*Companies House will have 'fun' with this as people try and ditch company numbers beginning with SC.
The commercial property market in Berwick upon Tweed will suddenly be looking very hot...
And it is on the East Coast Mainline as well.
Best not to buy anything north of the river, just in case.
Berwick is north of the river!
Indeed - Tweedmouth is on the south bank of the river
Both sides of the water would be the DMZ under HYUFD.
Not really as the border is 2.5 miles north of Berwick
Mind you it has been a garrison town for centuries
Not any more, to be precise. Barracks have been a couple of museums for some time (maybe 3 actually).
Yes but @HYUFD would have them restored to full garrison status
On a historical side note, it's actually a rather interesting building - one of the first purpose built barracks in the (then very new) UK. The gym is now a modern art centre, too.
I knew it well and good it is being used for the community
NYT - How the Super League Fell Apart Frantic phone calls, secret meetings and high-stakes threats: The inside story of how a billion-dollar European soccer superleague was born, and then collapsed, in less than a week.
. . . "[Aleksander] Ceferin, a lean, plain-spoken 53-year-old lawyer from Slovenia, was baffled. Only a few weeks earlier, his close friend and ally Andrea Agnelli, the president of the Italian league champion Juventus, the scion of one of Europe’s great industrial families and the leader of the association representing European soccer clubs, had assured him that whispers about a new round of breakaway talks were only “a rumor.”
Just a day earlier, in fact, Agnelli and his organization had recommitted to a suite of reforms to the Champions League, European soccer’s crown jewel and its biggest moneymaker. Everything was set to be approved on Monday.
Still, the drumbeat of rumors continued, and Ceferin felt he needed to be sure. So as he slid into the front seat of his Audi Q8 on Saturday to start the eight-hour drive from his home in Ljubljana to his office in Switzerland, he decided to get to the bottom of things. He placed a call to Agnelli. His friend did not pick up.
Ceferin — the godfather to Agnelli’s youngest child — texted the Italian’s wife and asked if she might get the Juventus president to call him urgently. He was three hours into his journey when his cellphone rang. Breezily, Agnelli reassured Ceferin, again, that everything was fine.
Ceferin suggested they issue a joint communiqué that would put the issue to rest. Agnelli agreed. Ceferin drafted a statement from the car and sent it to Agnelli. An hour later, Agnelli asked for time to send back an amended version. Hours passed. The men traded more calls. Eventually, the Italian told Ceferin he needed another 30 minutes.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
I think there's probably an opening for a joke about LibDems here, but I'll resist it...
When the Irish Free State was established in the early 1920s, did the UK government continue to pay pensions to its residents? I am sure I know the answer to that.
A very interesting point, because while Article 5 of the Anglo-Irish Treaty said that the Free State would pay war pensions and a pro-rata share of the national debt, it’s silent on other pensions. But the implication is the Irish would pay them (not that there would be many - some police, teachers and post office workers and perhaps a handful of civil servants, but most of the Irish Civil Service came from England).
However, in 1926 Ireland was released from its financial obligations under the AIT in exchange for not kicking up a fuss over the Boundary Commission’s refusal to transfer Fermanagh and Tyrone to the Free State.
And I cannot find out what happened to the pensions obligation then.
Edit - although this Hansard entry from 1962 on colonial pensions more generally gives some idea:
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
Her own party's excuse for rushing to a second referendum is that poor abused Scotland was "dragged out of the EU against our will."
If Scotland rejoins the EU, the customs posts have to go up.
She is therefore, demonstrably, talking a crock of shite. But will most likely win anyway.
Once again, while Sturgeon may be "rushing" to a referendum, I don't believe she has the slightest intention of ever getting there unless there's a poll showing YES ahead 70-30.
A second referendum is a huge risk - what happens if she loses or, and this is genuinely the worse prospect for her, what happens if she wins?
If she loses, her political career may be over but the SNP will carry on and continue to dominate Scottish politics and be a strong influence on British and English politics for decades. The dust won't have time to settle before the calls for a third vote will begin and we'll all realise we are trapped in tis dance.
Yet what if the vote for independence is won? Sturgeon's like of impotent luxury will be over and she will have to start taking some tough decisions. The SNP faithful will party but come the morning will also come the realisation all they had in common was the English. Once free of the "oppressors", they can start arguing for their competing versions of an independent Scotland until they realise independence is not only more elusive than they imagined but less than they had expected.
As I've said on here many times - the current status quo works for both Sturgeon and Johnson and if I know it, you can be sure they know it.
NYT - How the Super League Fell Apart Frantic phone calls, secret meetings and high-stakes threats: The inside story of how a billion-dollar European soccer superleague was born, and then collapsed, in less than a week.
. . . "[Aleksander] Ceferin, a lean, plain-spoken 53-year-old lawyer from Slovenia, was baffled. Only a few weeks earlier, his close friend and ally Andrea Agnelli, the president of the Italian league champion Juventus, the scion of one of Europe’s great industrial families and the leader of the association representing European soccer clubs, had assured him that whispers about a new round of breakaway talks were only “a rumor.”
Just a day earlier, in fact, Agnelli and his organization had recommitted to a suite of reforms to the Champions League, European soccer’s crown jewel and its biggest moneymaker. Everything was set to be approved on Monday.
Still, the drumbeat of rumors continued, and Ceferin felt he needed to be sure. So as he slid into the front seat of his Audi Q8 on Saturday to start the eight-hour drive from his home in Ljubljana to his office in Switzerland, he decided to get to the bottom of things. He placed a call to Agnelli. His friend did not pick up.
Ceferin — the godfather to Agnelli’s youngest child — texted the Italian’s wife and asked if she might get the Juventus president to call him urgently. He was three hours into his journey when his cellphone rang. Breezily, Agnelli reassured Ceferin, again, that everything was fine.
Ceferin suggested they issue a joint communiqué that would put the issue to rest. Agnelli agreed. Ceferin drafted a statement from the car and sent it to Agnelli. An hour later, Agnelli asked for time to send back an amended version. Hours passed. The men traded more calls. Eventually, the Italian told Ceferin he needed another 30 minutes.
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
I’m guessing you’ve never been active in local politics and never actually knocked on the doors of people with flags in their garden?
I've done that in suburban Northwest. Never had an issue with it.
Perfectly normal people.
Suggesting everyone with a flag is a racist is as idiotic and discriminatory as saying everyone with a hijab is a terrorist.
Of course it is.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
"The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about."
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson being prime examples.
I remember the widespread relief when New Labour announced its ethical foreign policy, early in its first term.
Yet it wasn’t that long before the very same politicians (cook honourably excepted) were laying waste to the Middle East on the basis of false, fabricated evidence.
Yep, Cook was a great loss. Would be fascinated to see his position on various areas of our current travails.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
"The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about."
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson being prime examples.
The Tory Party are very keen to wave A Johnson in our faces.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
This is an area where Labour used to win huge majorities until fairly recently, even with the Conservative areas like Solihull.
And Labour still holds nine of ten Parliamentary seats in Birmingham, and (just about) all three in Coventry. It's the spectacular implosion in the Black Country that's crippled them at mayoral level.
Indeed this is what I was saying last night - the answer to climate change is replacing dirty fuels with clean technology.
No more than that.
Rolling out clean technology to the rest of the world and weaning them off fossil fuels while preserving their right to economic prosperity for their people is not an inconsiderable challenge.
Nor is mitigating the damage already done which will continue for many decades until carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas levels begin to fall back.
That's the thing - climate change is happening and would continue even if the UK moved to a carbon-free economy overnight tonight. The cumulative growth of greenhouse gases is going to continue to impact on global climate for decades even after we've mitigated further damage.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
It's very simple; human nutrition and long term health depends on micronutrients - vitamins, minerals, enzymes, amino acids, etc. If they are not present in our food, then digesting food uses the body's own supply. That results in poor health and quicker death. Animal products are not only more nutrient dense as a rule than vegetable ones, the nutrients within them are easier to assimilate. The drawbacks of a vegetarian diet in this regard can be offset to a large extent with a generous allowance of eggs, healthy dairy, etc. With the vegan 'diet' that crutch is effectively kicked away, and that is why veganism especially deserves strong disapproval. It is stupid to practise on one's self, and positively cruel to inflict on a child or dependent whose bodies are growing.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
"The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about."
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson being prime examples.
There are plenty on the other side of the equation too. Nancy Pelosi, AOC, Clinton etc etc.
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
I’m guessing you’ve never been active in local politics and never actually knocked on the doors of people with flags in their garden?
I've done that in suburban Northwest. Never had an issue with it.
Perfectly normal people.
Suggesting everyone with a flag is a racist is as idiotic and discriminatory as saying everyone with a hijab is a terrorist.
Of course it is.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
I’m guessing you’ve never been active in local politics and never actually knocked on the doors of people with flags in their garden?
I've done that in suburban Northwest. Never had an issue with it.
Perfectly normal people.
Suggesting everyone with a flag is a racist is as idiotic and discriminatory as saying everyone with a hijab is a terrorist.
Of course it is.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
Particularly those with EU flags flying.
I tend to avoid them.
Very wise.
Objectively, I’d include all flag flyers in the category.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
This is an area where Labour used to win huge majorities until fairly recently, even with the Conservative areas like Solihull.
And Labour still holds nine of ten Parliamentary seats in Birmingham, and (just about) all three in Coventry. It's the spectacular implosion in the Black Country that's crippled them at mayoral level.
wasnt one of the coverntry seats down to a few hundred votes?
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
This is an area where Labour used to win huge majorities until fairly recently, even with the Conservative areas like Solihull.
And Labour still holds nine of ten Parliamentary seats in Birmingham, and (just about) all three in Coventry. It's the spectacular implosion in the Black Country that's crippled them at mayoral level.
wasnt one of the coverntry seats down to a few hundred votes?
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
You seem much more aware of other people's politics than I.
On the more interesting "food" subject, I would say the choices for non-meat eaters at restaurants have improved out of all recognition in recent times. A fine example of capitalism and market forces driving innovation - if businesses recognise vegans and vegetarians are consumers with money to spend, they will design menus and choices for the entirety of their customer base.
Only on PB would people be scared of vegans. Some people are vegans, some aren’t. It’s all fine. Get over it.
Nobody is scared of vegans, they'd run after you for all of five minutes till they needed a lie down.
I was at lunch with a vegan today.
a) she didn’t mention veganism once b) she was a great laugh c) she could outrun you in her sleep
That's interesting, how did you manage to deduce it without her mentioning it? Was it the brittle hair and bone cracking noises that put you on to it?
She’s a friend of mine. She has neither brittle hair nor cracking bones. You just sound ridiculous. Eat what you like, stop judging others. It’s pathetic.
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
This is an area where Labour used to win huge majorities until fairly recently, even with the Conservative areas like Solihull.
And Labour still holds nine of ten Parliamentary seats in Birmingham, and (just about) all three in Coventry. It's the spectacular implosion in the Black Country that's crippled them at mayoral level.
wasnt one of the coverntry seats down to a few hundred votes?
Yes, Coventry South (maj. 401.) I remember it being said at the time that the Labour candidate was almost certainly rescued by the student vote.
Her own party's excuse for rushing to a second referendum is that poor abused Scotland was "dragged out of the EU against our will."
If Scotland rejoins the EU, the customs posts have to go up.
She is therefore, demonstrably, talking a crock of shite. But will most likely win anyway.
Once again, while Sturgeon may be "rushing" to a referendum, I don't believe she has the slightest intention of ever getting there unless there's a poll showing YES ahead 70-30.
A second referendum is a huge risk - what happens if she loses or, and this is genuinely the worse prospect for her, what happens if she wins?
If she loses, her political career may be over but the SNP will carry on and continue to dominate Scottish politics and be a strong influence on British and English politics for decades. The dust won't have time to settle before the calls for a third vote will begin and we'll all realise we are trapped in tis dance.
Yet what if the vote for independence is won? Sturgeon's like of impotent luxury will be over and she will have to start taking some tough decisions. The SNP faithful will party but come the morning will also come the realisation all they had in common was the English. Once free of the "oppressors", they can start arguing for their competing versions of an independent Scotland until they realise independence is not only more elusive than they imagined but less than they had expected.
As I've said on here many times - the current status quo works for both Sturgeon and Johnson and if I know it, you can be sure they know it.
The only fly in the ointment being that the Tories can quite happily find excuses to stonewall the Scottish Parliament forever, whereas at some point the SNP will be expected to deliver. After all, if it becomes obvious that the party of independence is incapable of delivering independence, then what is the continued point of it?
Electoral Commission confirm they are in “discussions” with the Conservative Party over whether funds used to refurbish Boris Johnson’s flat in Downing Street need to be “reported and subsequently published” https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1385305236726759427
Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ West Midlands Mayoral Election voting intention poll finds incumbent Conservative candidate Andy Street leading over Labour and Co-Operative candidate Liam Byrne by 9%. Altogether, our voting intention results are as follows:
This is an area where Labour used to win huge majorities until fairly recently, even with the Conservative areas like Solihull.
And Labour still holds nine of ten Parliamentary seats in Birmingham, and (just about) all three in Coventry. It's the spectacular implosion in the Black Country that's crippled them at mayoral level.
wasnt one of the coverntry seats down to a few hundred votes?
Yes, Coventry South (maj. 401.) I remember it being said at the time that the Labour candidate was almost certainly rescued by the student vote.
Although Coventry North West is also down to 200 votes, albeit Taiwo Owatemi is an outsider selected to annoy the Labour Party hierarchy and has also had issues supporting dodgy groups.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
If someone wants to call me a murderer because I eat meat then that is offensive.
And, they won't stop until no-one can eat meat - and it's illegal.
A line of defence needs to be thrown up now, before they advance any further.
Just the same as any other religion, which is what it is to some people.
Any time anyone wants to shove their religion down the throat of others - whether it be veganism or Christianity, Islam or whatever else you choose - religions like that need to be fought against.
Fundamentally, climate change is driven by us burning billions of tons of fossil fuels every year - humans have eaten meat and fish in modest numbers since the dawn of time.
If the Conservatives go down that road they will open up a huge flank on their right, which I will look at voting for with interest.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
You seem much more aware of other people's politics than I.
On the more interesting "food" subject, I would say the choices for non-meat eaters at restaurants have improved out of all recognition in recent times. A fine example of capitalism and market forces driving innovation - if businesses recognise vegans and vegetarians are consumers with money to spend, they will design menus and choices for the entirety of their customer base.
Yup. Lots of vegan choices on menus in London now, which is great to see. I’m a lover of meat, but I’ll often choose a light vegan lunch as it keeps the weight off.
I do wonder how many PBers get through life, if the poor snowflakes are triggered by vegans, how do they cope with day to day living?
I'm not remotely triggered by vegans - I know several who are lovely people and I am sure most are the same. I also don't really mind them proselytising - saying you're a vegan must be one of the few rewards.
Where I start to have an issue is with the cynical promotion, backed by the millions by the likes of Monsanto, of veganism as a 'healthier' lifestyle, which it very obviously isn't. The net result of this is to get people off diary (which has good and bad aspects) and eating instead an American GM cash crop like almonds or soy, which doesn't have anything like the nutritional profile of good dairy. That is Monsanto 1, Humankind nil.
Furthermore, I didn't bring this subject up, it was brought here because an imbecile politician is trying to guilt people into giving up what are wonderful things to eat, enjoy, and get nutrition from, because of a spurious notion that this will save the planet. I was then asked why this issue annoyed me and gave an answer.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
Hmm. My office is pretty wokey (typical young, metro, middle class professionals) and I don't recognise this sort of behaviour at all. Lots of very happy meat eaters in the group, and if anything, the vegetarians (I don't think we have any vegans) are the ones who get lightly teased for being difficult.
I sort of get what you're saying on the cultural war front, but I don't think it's a real worry. There is nothing on this Earth that is going to persuade lefty woke types to stop flying, and that's so obviously a bigger problem for the climate than eating meat that the sort of social pressure to change behaviour you describe just can't happen, in my view.
When my then gf (now wife) stopped being a vegetarian it was one of the best moments of our relationship up to then. She hasn't regretted it for a minute either. In her words "I just really like burgers".
I've had a vegans try and lecture me, I usually give them an eyeroll and they stop. My wife is much less subtle, she's fallen out with friends who couldn't just shut the fuck up about it.
A lot of the time it seems as though they're really only trying to convince themselves that eating rabbit food and substandard meat like substitutes isn't really awful.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
"The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about."
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson being prime examples.
There are plenty on the other side of the equation too. Nancy Pelosi, AOC, Clinton etc etc.
Personally think your examples from "the other side" are pretty darn weak.
Certainly NOT competition for either The Donald or your own beloved BoJo on THIS score!
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
If someone wants to call me a murderer because I eat meat then that is offensive.
And, they won't stop until no-one can eat meat - and it's illegal.
A line of defence needs to be thrown up now, before they advance any further.
Just the same as any other religion, which is what it is to some people.
Any time anyone wants to shove their religion down the throat of others - whether it be veganism or Christianity, Islam or whatever else you choose - religions like that need to be fought against.
Fundamentally, climate change is driven by us burning billions of tons of fossil fuels every year - humans have eaten meat and fish in modest numbers since the dawn of time.
If the Conservatives go down that road they will open up a huge flank on their right, which I will look at voting for with interest.
And me. And i'm a party man...
There's no likelihood of the Conservative Party splitting and, therefore, no likelihood of a right-wing challenger party appearing, either.
The only party ever to seriously threaten the Tories from the Right was Ukip, which had a unique purpose and which disintegrated once that purpose had been served. All that exists, and is likely to exist, out on that wing now are fringe Muslim-bashing parties, like the BNP only even less popular and lacking the notoriety.
Besides, the Conservatives are not about to turn into the Radical Vegan Front. Quite besides anything else, the average Tory voter is now aged about 102. Depriving codgers of their roast beef and Yorkshire pudding could conceivably be the only policy that would upset the core support more than the Dementia Tax.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
You seem much more aware of other people's politics than I.
On the more interesting "food" subject, I would say the choices for non-meat eaters at restaurants have improved out of all recognition in recent times. A fine example of capitalism and market forces driving innovation - if businesses recognise vegans and vegetarians are consumers with money to spend, they will design menus and choices for the entirety of their customer base.
People readily share their politics these days and, if they don't, it's readily calculable from other environmental factors.
I've seen it working in both directions. There's one restaurant I now no longer go to because it has cut its meat options and increasing its vegan nonsense, and virtue-signalled about it on top.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
"The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about."
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson being prime examples.
There are plenty on the other side of the equation too. Nancy Pelosi, AOC, Clinton etc etc.
Personally think your examples from "the other side" are pretty darn weak.
Certainly NOT competition for either The Donald or your own beloved BoJo on THIS score!
And, you're totally objective of course in assessing your own side.
Wokeism and the left-wing idiocy that surrounds it is part of what drove The Donald, and still does for the Republican Party.
When my then gf (now wife) stopped being a vegetarian it was one of the best moments of our relationship up to then. She hasn't regretted it for a minute either. In her words "I just really like burgers".
I've had a vegans try and lecture me, I usually give them an eyeroll and they stop. My wife is much less subtle, she's fallen out with friends who couldn't just shut the fuck up about it.
A lot of the time it seems as though they're really only trying to convince themselves that eating rabbit food and substandard meat like substitutes isn't really awful.
When my then gf (now wife) stopped being a vegetarian it was one of the best moments of our relationship up to then. She hasn't regretted it for a minute either. In her words "I just really like burgers".
I've had a vegans try and lecture me, I usually give them an eyeroll and they stop. My wife is much less subtle, she's fallen out with friends who couldn't just shut the fuck up about it.
A lot of the time it seems as though they're really only trying to convince themselves that eating rabbit food and substandard meat like substitutes isn't really awful.
I don’t understand the anger towards vegans/veganism. I genuinely don’t get it.
Why are you so angry?
I think it is because some vegetarians (and even more vegans) "wear" their dietary choice in moralistic terms in a way that they create the impression that they think they are superior to others. That's what gets people's backs up.
I was a vegetarian for about ten years and a pescatarian for about ten years more. But it was just about diet and what I was comfortable with personally. I never talked about it - why would I? - unless someone asked the infuriatingly boring question "why are you vegetarian?". My logic at the time was that I was not prepared to eat something that I wasn't prepared to kill myself.
Yes, I've never had a problem with vegetarians - ever.
I think veganism (like wokeism) is quasi-religious and people hate being preached at. Plus, both creeds are impervious to evidence where it conflicts with their dogma, turning to shaming when challenged instead, which frustrates & stokes people even more.
I completely agree that veganism (like wokeism) can be quasi-religious but not always and i wouldn't want to tar all vegans with that brush.
How do you tell if someone is a vegan? You don't, talk to them for five minutes and they'll tell you.
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
The thing is we live in a narcisstic self-absorbed age when waving your penis around is what it's all about.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
Hmm. My office is pretty wokey (typical young, metro, middle class professionals) and I don't recognise this sort of behaviour at all. Lots of very happy meat eaters in the group, and if anything, the vegetarians (I don't think we have any vegans) are the ones who get lightly teased for being difficult.
I sort of get what you're saying on the cultural war front, but I don't think it's a real worry. There is nothing on this Earth that is going to persuade lefty woke types to stop flying, and that's so obviously a bigger problem for the climate than eating meat that the sort of social pressure to change behaviour you describe just can't happen, in my view.
You're lucky. I envy you.
I don't think there's anything worse than being lectured by a hypocrite.
The moral of the story seems to be that in England where the Tories are led by Boris the party is doing well nationwide, but in the other nations with their own leaders the party is struggling.
So how do we find a Welsh and Scottish Boris?
The tories are English nationalists, now.
Is there anything wrong with that? 🏴
In theory no, in practice yes. If you doubt this, take a look at the sort of people who profess the creed of EngNat. It's a grim bunch, by and large. There's a big overlap with far right sentiment.
No that's your closed-minded bigotry.
Like you saying you'd hate having a neighbour who flies a flag. Its perfectly normal to fly a flag around here.
Spend a bit of time looking into it and you'll see what I mean. If having discovered what a typical ardent Eng Nat looks like, you don't see the problem then you are a problem.
A typical Eng Nat is an entirely normal person.
Just like a typical Scot Nat or French Nat or anyone else.
If you are too closed minded to see that then you are part of the problem.
As I say, take a look into it. The speed of your reply indicates you haven't. There's no shame in learning or conceding something. You'll grow in stature. Same if you were to stop the childish mimicking of my language. Ardent Eng Nat has a particular character. There's quite an overlap with far right. Not totally, of course, but the link is there. It ought to trouble you. It would me if I were that way inclined. Eg, a small proportion of Labour members being antisemites (rightly) tarnished Labour. I know you agree with me on that. So here you cannot argue that a much larger proportion of Eng Nats being racist xenophobes leaves that creed untainted. You cannot argue that, ergo it's better that you don't try.
There is no "particular character" for English nationalists, you are making that up in your own head.
What you are doing is typical English Socialism, or Ingsoc for short. You are attempting to define positions you dislike as ungood, by defining them by association as those who are doubleplusungood.
The Labour Party was tarnished by xenophobia because they institutionally allowed, welcomed, tolerated and promoted people who were xenophobic. They challenged and harrassed anyone who tried to blow the whistle or criticise xenophobia. That is what the ECHR investigation was all about - and that is why the issue was dropped once Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Party, because Starmer dealt with it. There is no such comparison with English nationalism since there is no English nationalist party, except some would say the Tories, and none of that happens within that party.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, whether English or otherwise, and your attempts to pretend there is something "tarnished" about it by you choosing to define who you think is or is not nationalist based upon your own prejudices is just pure bigotry on your own party. With an Ingsoc rewriting of the truth.
I can only ask that you check out the links between ardent Eng Nats and the far right. If you won't, you won't. But it's a shame.
That is like me saying I want you to check the links between wearing denim and the far right.
There is nothing there. Just the superficial bullshit spread by Ingsoc extremists who hate their own country and think anyone who flies a flag is a racist.
Such a shame.
That's what I think about your small mindedness.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
I’m guessing you’ve never been active in local politics and never actually knocked on the doors of people with flags in their garden?
I've done that in suburban Northwest. Never had an issue with it.
Perfectly normal people.
Suggesting everyone with a flag is a racist is as idiotic and discriminatory as saying everyone with a hijab is a terrorist.
Of course it is.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
Perhaps you dont think they are level headed because you are a lib dem. I might be inclined to talk to a conservative canvasser or a labour canvasser if they stopped me in the street and have a civil conversation. A lib dem will always be told to where to go
I heard a terrible statistic on NPR yesterday. During the 30 day trial of Chauvin, 60 people of colour, of both sexes, from the age of 13 up, where killed by the police across the US.
A lot of things need to change, yesterday.
Interesting article about this in the Telegraph - I was, perhaps rather naively, shocked to see that ina typical year 1000 American civilians will be killes by the police, and 50 policemen will be killed in the line of duty. The second stat rather explains the first - American policing is a high stakes job. The only answer that I can see is having far fewer guns in society - though how that is achieved I haveno idea.
It is worth remembering that 50 policemen killed a year sounds like a lot, but is the equivalent of less than one per state per year.
I don't know any other country where the ratio of police deaths to non-police deaths is more than about 2 or 3:1, 20:1 is an order of magnitude more.
I heard a terrible statistic on NPR yesterday. During the 30 day trial of Chauvin, 60 people of colour, of both sexes, from the age of 13 up, where killed by the police across the US.
A lot of things need to change, yesterday.
Interesting article about this in the Telegraph - I was, perhaps rather naively, shocked to see that ina typical year 1000 American civilians will be killes by the police, and 50 policemen will be killed in the line of duty. The second stat rather explains the first - American policing is a high stakes job. The only answer that I can see is having far fewer guns in society - though how that is achieved I haveno idea.
It is worth remembering that 50 policemen killed a year sounds like a lot, but is the equivalent of less than one per state per year.
I don't know any other country where the ratio of police deaths to non-police deaths is more than about 2 or 3:1, 20:1 is an order of magnitude more.
Just following up my own post. I don't see this principally as a race related issue, but more of a police militarization issue.
A fake call about a hostage situation, and the police raid the place with guns blazing and kill someone. How can the first response to an alleged hostage situation be an attack by police armed with submachine guns?
Comments
I call that the EuCo needing to maintain an arsecovering narrative for UVDL and cronies.
In about 4 months EU Citizens will be asking "why did we continue dying after it had stopped in comparable countries", and EuCo will try to blame Az, UK, US, "vaccine nationalism", and then EU-27 health systems rolling out too slowly and places like Belgium and France unlocking too quickly.
EU politics for you. Anybody Else But Me.
The basic responsibility is of course the wrong people doing the job, making the wrong decisions last year. They need a very big smokescreen.
You should get out more. Leave your Ingsoc bubble and speak to people who are English nationalists and people who put flags in their garden.
You'll find they're perfectly normal, decent people.
If the Conservatives go down that road they will open up a huge flank on their right, which I will look at voting for with interest.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1385291091428192259?s=20
How many flights a day from India?
https://twitter.com/sparkyhamill/status/1385285505760350209?s=20
Yet it wasn’t that long before the very same politicians (cook honourably excepted) were laying waste to the Middle East on the basis of false, fabricated evidence.
Andy Street (Conservative) 46%
Liam Byrne (Labour and Co-Operative) 37%
Jenny Wilkinson (Liberal Democrats) 6%
Steve Caudwell (Green) 5%
Pete Durnell (Reform UK) 4%
Other 3%
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/west-midlands-mayoral-election-voting-intention-18-21-april-2021/
No more than that.
You get some idiots with or without flags. They're idiots and there's no relation.
Suggesting everyone with a flag is a racist is as idiotic and discriminatory as saying everyone with a hijab is a terrorist.
And, in principal, there’s nothing wrong with having a flag in your garden.
But I’d be amazed if anyone who has regularly been out door knocking over the years hadn’t noticed that such people tend, on average, much less likely to be, shall we say, level headed?
Frantic phone calls, secret meetings and high-stakes threats: The inside story of how a billion-dollar European soccer superleague was born, and then collapsed, in less than a week.
. . . "[Aleksander] Ceferin, a lean, plain-spoken 53-year-old lawyer from Slovenia, was baffled. Only a few weeks earlier, his close friend and ally Andrea Agnelli, the president of the Italian league champion Juventus, the scion of one of Europe’s great industrial families and the leader of the association representing European soccer clubs, had assured him that whispers about a new round of breakaway talks were only “a rumor.”
Just a day earlier, in fact, Agnelli and his organization had recommitted to a suite of reforms to the Champions League, European soccer’s crown jewel and its biggest moneymaker. Everything was set to be approved on Monday.
Still, the drumbeat of rumors continued, and Ceferin felt he needed to be sure. So as he slid into the front seat of his Audi Q8 on Saturday to start the eight-hour drive from his home in Ljubljana to his office in Switzerland, he decided to get to the bottom of things. He placed a call to Agnelli. His friend did not pick up.
Ceferin — the godfather to Agnelli’s youngest child — texted the Italian’s wife and asked if she might get the Juventus president to call him urgently. He was three hours into his journey when his cellphone rang. Breezily, Agnelli reassured Ceferin, again, that everything was fine.
Ceferin suggested they issue a joint communiqué that would put the issue to rest. Agnelli agreed. Ceferin drafted a statement from the car and sent it to Agnelli. An hour later, Agnelli asked for time to send back an amended version. Hours passed. The men traded more calls. Eventually, the Italian told Ceferin he needed another 30 minutes.
And then Agnelli turned off his phone." . . . .
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/sports/soccer/super-league-soccer.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
However, in 1926 Ireland was released from its financial obligations under the AIT in exchange for not kicking up a fuss over the Boundary Commission’s refusal to transfer Fermanagh and Tyrone to the Free State.
And I cannot find out what happened to the pensions obligation then.
Edit - although this Hansard entry from 1962 on colonial pensions more generally gives some idea:
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1962/jun/06/pensions-of-former-colonial-service
The thing is that if people keep it to themselves its not an issue. If I go out for a meal and someone orders a vegan dish while I order a chicken dish and nothing is said, there's no problem with that. Its the people who have to tell you that they're vegan and have a go at meat eaters - that's the problem.
Again viewing it as like a religion, one of my favourite jokes about religion applies: A religion is like a penis. Its fine to have one. Its fine to be proud of it. But please don't whip it out in public and wave it around. And please don't shove it down my children's throat.
A second referendum is a huge risk - what happens if she loses or, and this is genuinely the worse prospect for her, what happens if she wins?
If she loses, her political career may be over but the SNP will carry on and continue to dominate Scottish politics and be a strong influence on British and English politics for decades. The dust won't have time to settle before the calls for a third vote will begin and we'll all realise we are trapped in tis dance.
Yet what if the vote for independence is won? Sturgeon's like of impotent luxury will be over and she will have to start taking some tough decisions. The SNP faithful will party but come the morning will also come the realisation all they had in common was the English. Once free of the "oppressors", they can start arguing for their competing versions of an independent Scotland until they realise independence is not only more elusive than they imagined but less than they had expected.
As I've said on here many times - the current status quo works for both Sturgeon and Johnson and if I know it, you can be sure they know it.
I tend to avoid them.
Meat shaming is starting to become a thing. I've definitely noticed some left-wing meat eaters self-selecting vegan dishes in business situations to stay beneath the radar but enthusiastically ordering a burger when they're just with me because I'm "safe".
I order WTF I like, and endure the looks. It wouldn't surprise me if there came a time when I was actively challenged - in a passive-aggressive "jokey" way of course.
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson being prime examples.
Nor is mitigating the damage already done which will continue for many decades until carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas levels begin to fall back.
That's the thing - climate change is happening and would continue even if the UK moved to a carbon-free economy overnight tonight. The cumulative growth of greenhouse gases is going to continue to impact on global climate for decades even after we've mitigated further damage.
Objectively, I’d include all flag flyers in the category.
a) she didn’t mention veganism once
b) she was a great laugh
c) she could outrun you in her sleep
It’s how we manage when we’re awake that actually counts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_South_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
It’s held by Zarah Sultana, who is a slightly crazier version of Laura Pidcock.
On the more interesting "food" subject, I would say the choices for non-meat eaters at restaurants have improved out of all recognition in recent times. A fine example of capitalism and market forces driving innovation - if businesses recognise vegans and vegetarians are consumers with money to spend, they will design menus and choices for the entirety of their customer base.
This is just simply something deniers say to keep it under the radar, until it's too late.
...
NEW THREAD
Where I start to have an issue is with the cynical promotion, backed by the millions by the likes of Monsanto, of veganism as a 'healthier' lifestyle, which it very obviously isn't. The net result of this is to get people off diary (which has good and bad aspects) and eating instead an American GM cash crop like almonds or soy, which doesn't have anything like the nutritional profile of good dairy. That is Monsanto 1, Humankind nil.
Furthermore, I didn't bring this subject up, it was brought here because an imbecile politician is trying to guilt people into giving up what are wonderful things to eat, enjoy, and get nutrition from, because of a spurious notion that this will save the planet. I was then asked why this issue annoyed me and gave an answer.
I sort of get what you're saying on the cultural war front, but I don't think it's a real worry. There is nothing on this Earth that is going to persuade lefty woke types to stop flying, and that's so obviously a bigger problem for the climate than eating meat that the sort of social pressure to change behaviour you describe just can't happen, in my view.
I've had a vegans try and lecture me, I usually give them an eyeroll and they stop. My wife is much less subtle, she's fallen out with friends who couldn't just shut the fuck up about it.
A lot of the time it seems as though they're really only trying to convince themselves that eating rabbit food and substandard meat like substitutes isn't really awful.
Certainly NOT competition for either The Donald or your own beloved BoJo on THIS score!
The only party ever to seriously threaten the Tories from the Right was Ukip, which had a unique purpose and which disintegrated once that purpose had been served. All that exists, and is likely to exist, out on that wing now are fringe Muslim-bashing parties, like the BNP only even less popular and lacking the notoriety.
Besides, the Conservatives are not about to turn into the Radical Vegan Front. Quite besides anything else, the average Tory voter is now aged about 102. Depriving codgers of their roast beef and Yorkshire pudding could conceivably be the only policy that would upset the core support more than the Dementia Tax.
I've seen it working in both directions. There's one restaurant I now no longer go to because it has cut its meat options and increasing its vegan nonsense, and virtue-signalled about it on top.
Wokeism and the left-wing idiocy that surrounds it is part of what drove The Donald, and still does for the Republican Party.
I don't think there's anything worse than being lectured by a hypocrite.
I don't know any other country where the ratio of police deaths to non-police deaths is more than about 2 or 3:1, 20:1 is an order of magnitude more.
The story that really haunts me is this one: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/14/us/swatting-sentence-casey-vinbner
A fake call about a hostage situation, and the police raid the place with guns blazing and kill someone. How can the first response to an alleged hostage situation be an attack by police armed with submachine guns?