115 dying an hour in India but likely to be a lot more
This is just terrible
Wealthy countries were warned we should pause our rollout once vulnerable populations were covered. And unfortunately our failure to help out other countries is likely to lead to new variants as well as devastation in places like India.
@malcolmg - that was a really insightful post you wrote on what you thought about the situation in Scotland. Re the SNP being in trouble, two questions (1) what exactly is driving that - concern over its performance, the Salmond affair etc and (2) if you are saying Labour is benefiting (and the LDs), that sounds like the SNP might be losing the Central Belt. Is that a fair assessment?
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
By next weekend all will be revealed
Alien visitation ?
What about MY theory, that Boris is himself a space alien? (Like Trumpsky!)
WOULD explain a great deal . . .
A flying spaghetti monster that crashed to earth ? Could explain the hairstyle, I suppose.
115 dying an hour in India but likely to be a lot more
This is just terrible
Wealthy countries were warned we should pause our rollout once vulnerable populations were covered. And unfortunately our failure to help out other countries is likely to lead to new variants as well as devastation in places like India.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
Reid is an old man, who recently suggested that the Chinese, Russians... and the French were in on it. The other guy appears to be another species of grifter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
Rubio isn’t old or retired. In fact he’d have a right to think he has another reasonable run at President left him.
Right now, Senator Marco Rubio is eating the dust of two other Sunshine State GOP presidential hopefuls: Governor Ron DeSantis and Senator Rick Scott.
Rubio hasn't a chance though early days. However, it feels like the next candidate will be a Governor rather than a Senator.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Though Jo Grimond was always Jo. And that was quite a long time ago now.
For quite a long time, I assmed Jo Grimond was female and thought that having a female leader so early was an indication of the progressive nature of the Liberals.
I therefore conclude that it was all a ploy to secure Liberal support among the feminist/me too (and, I admit, historically ignorant) generations half a century later.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
Wouldn't it make more sense IF you're worried about giving offense, to NOT use ANY nickname, unless the person uses it themselves (as in case of Joe Biden) OR you are otherwise 100% sure it's ok?
For example, somehow get the feeling that you - Charles - MIGHT be offended if someone you didn't know called you "Charlie" or "Chuck"?
I'd say that your practice is your choice, and if there are consequences you also choose those.
And it's not really worth the kremlinology.
The most famous Jo in British History is probably either Joseph of Nazareth, or Joe 90.
and the Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat?
Does that qualify for British History? Andrew Lloyd-Webber & Tim Rice are both Brits.
Vaccine anecdote. Just got jabbed (AZ) but the centre looked like it wasn't using anywhere near its full capacity (lots of empty vaccination booths). I know it has also been closing every day at about 6pm.
The centre is based at an athletics track that my daughter trains at with the local athletics club. They have taken over the middle and one of the bends of the track so only 300m is usable. I just received an email from the athletics club to say that evening training sessions will be going on whilst the vaccination centre is still open. I imagine they must be anticipating increased supply. Good news if so.
Comparator.
My local mass centre is still running from 8am to 10pm. But they are not running at capacity for lanes - but they have space set out for 30 lanes, which is a *lot* as there is another centre at the district hospital, and whatever else there is in Pharmacies etc.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
That is exactly the point about Boris, he is a marmite figure, but those who like him really like him, women particularly.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
By next weekend all will be revealed
Alien visitation ?
What about MY theory, that Boris is himself a space alien? (Like Trumpsky!)
WOULD explain a great deal . . .
A flying spaghetti monster that crashed to earth ? Could explain the hairstyle, I suppose.
I imagine the UK's versions of Q-Anon followers think that it is Boris Johnson that is secretly fighting the Aliens: the lizard people that are disguised as Kier Starmer and most foreign (particularly European) leaders.
The £200k refurbishment of the flat in No 11 was actually part of an anti-surveillance sweep in response to the lizard people threat, and the reason for Johnson's often incoherent "er er er ers" is a result of aliens trying to interfere with his speech patterns with a German manufactured sonic ray gun that is designed to make Boris tell lies, something he is uniquely immune to.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
Reid is an old man, who recently suggested that the Chinese, Russians... and the French were in on it. The other guy appears to be another species of grifter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
Rubio isn’t old or retired. In fact he’d have a right to think he has another reasonable run at President left him.
Right now, Senator Marco Rubio is eating the dust of two other Sunshine State GOP presidential hopefuls: Governor Ron DeSantis and Senator Rick Scott.
Rubio hasn't a chance though early days. However, it feels like the next candidate will be a Governor rather than a Senator.
Or maybe an ex-governor, like former South Carolina Governor (and former UN Ambassador) Nikki Haley.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
Wouldn't it make more sense IF you're worried about giving offense, to NOT use ANY nickname, unless the person uses it themselves (as in case of Joe Biden) OR you are otherwise 100% sure it's ok?
For example, somehow get the feeling that you - Charles - MIGHT be offended if someone you didn't know called you "Charlie" or "Chuck"?
I'd say that your practice is your choice, and if there are consequences you also choose those.
And it's not really worth the kremlinology.
The most famous Jo in British History is probably either Joseph of Nazareth, or Joe 90.
and the Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat?
Does that qualify for British History? Andrew Lloyd-Webber & Tim Rice are both Brits.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
By next weekend all will be revealed
Alien visitation ?
What about MY theory, that Boris is himself a space alien? (Like Trumpsky!)
WOULD explain a great deal . . .
A flying spaghetti monster that crashed to earth ? Could explain the hairstyle, I suppose.
And the number of people touched by his noodly appendage?
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
By next weekend all will be revealed
Alien visitation ?
What about MY theory, that Boris is himself a space alien? (Like Trumpsky!)
WOULD explain a great deal . . .
A flying spaghetti monster that crashed to earth ? Could explain the hairstyle, I suppose.
And the number of people touched by his noodly appendage?
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
Isn't the US just better equipped to detect and record whatever they are? An anomaly over New Guinea wouldn't be.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
That is exactly the point about Boris, he is a marmite figure, but those who like him really like him, women particularly.
My wife thinks he's "a bit of a scamp". Make of that what you will.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
That is exactly the point about Boris, he is a marmite figure, but those who like him really like him, women particularly.
That's not supported by the polling. Johnson repeatedly has worse ratings amongst women than men.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
Reid is an old man, who recently suggested that the Chinese, Russians... and the French were in on it. The other guy appears to be another species of grifter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
Rubio isn’t old or retired. In fact he’d have a right to think he has another reasonable run at President left him.
Right now, Senator Marco Rubio is eating the dust of two other Sunshine State GOP presidential hopefuls: Governor Ron DeSantis and Senator Rick Scott.
Rubio hasn't a chance though early days. However, it feels like the next candidate will be a Governor rather than a Senator.
DeSantis is the man for me
His approach to covid over the winter took enormous courage and was executed in the face of huge pressure. He started from the assumption he was a conservative and looked at what he could do given his principles. As a result his state is powering ahead economically, is much freer than others and excess deaths are no higher (in many cases lower) than other states.
He has the priceless ability to ignore the screeches of the mainstream media and its cohorts when he does something they don't like. Indeed he is one of those conservatives who thinks the louder they are screeching, the better I'm doing.
He is everything Boris Johnson is not, and when he comes to greater prominence as he surely will, his example will cast Johnson's conservatives in a very poor light. Also he appears unencumbered by the fragile ego that so hit Trump.
About as relevant as polling whether we'd like it to be sunny or rain tomorrow. Where's Andrew?
Andrew is now up to 10% approval from 7% approval last month, 79% disapprove so he has closed the gap with Meghan as the most unpopular royal (or ex royal)
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
I'm not buying that. If you can send unmanned probes to other systems with expectations of collecting useful data, you can also equip them with enough decision making protocols to stay out of range until you've figured out how good the life you're about to discover is at spotting your tech. Anyway, if this was true then a thousand amateurs would also have spotted the probes by now, not just the US military.
Also, given the convergent evolution on Earth wrt sight, I think it's a good bet that alien lifeforms would "see" the same way.
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
He has been Mayor in Springfield for 35 years at least now, and survived God knows how many corruption scandals and even having Homer Simpson in charge of nuclear safety. So, yes, quite the politician as well as an amazing parody of American small-town corruption and incompetence.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
I'm not buying that. If you can send unmanned probes to other systems with expectations of collecting useful data, you can also equip them with enough decision making protocols to stay out of range until you've figured out how good the life you're about to discover is at spotting your tech. Anyway, if this was true then a thousand amateurs would also have spotted the probes by now, not just the US military.
Also, given the convergent evolution on Earth wrt sight, I think it's a good bet that alien lifeforms would "see" the same way.
Although no other species sees the same rainbow we do.
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
Off-topic - Any Lovejoy fans out there (books not TV)? I'm trying to recall which book it is where there is a buried Victorian engine in a tunnel, complete with a silver locomotive - can anyone help?
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
New - No 10 spokesman: “Any costs of wider refurbishment this year beyond those provided for by the annual allowance have been met by the PM personally. Conservative Party funds are not being used for this”
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
I'm not buying that. If you can send unmanned probes to other systems with expectations of collecting useful data, you can also equip them with enough decision making protocols to stay out of range until you've figured out how good the life you're about to discover is at spotting your tech. Anyway, if this was true then a thousand amateurs would also have spotted the probes by now, not just the US military.
Also, given the convergent evolution on Earth wrt sight, I think it's a good bet that alien lifeforms would "see" the same way.
Amateurs can only spot big things or near things; no earth based telescope can see any of the stuff we left on the moon. And you would expect probes to be competently stealthed.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
About as relevant as polling whether we'd like it to be sunny or rain tomorrow. Where's Andrew?
Andrew is now up to 10% approval from 7% approval last month, 79% disapprove so he has closed the gap with Meghan as the most unpopular royal (or ex royal)
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris. Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
I though our magnificent government had prohibited all canvassing in these elections. Was there a special dispensation for Conservative canvassers?
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris. Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
I though our magnificent government had prohibited all canvassing in these elections. Was there a special dispensation for Conservative canvassers?
Electioneering was exempt from covid rules since about march.
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
We really are mistreating asylum seekers by putting them in Britannia hotels.
I don't see the funny side of people getting harassed. Whether asylum seekers or not.
Anyone engaged in this should be prosecuted. This is harassment not free speech.
It is also intimidation of the hotel and their guests. Banging on doors demanding to know who is in there could be construed as threatening behaviour or even assault. Trespass too. Who do these people think they are?
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris. Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
I though our magnificent government had prohibited all canvassing in these elections. Was there a special dispensation for Conservative canvassers?
Electioneering was exempt from covid rules since about march.
Canvassing is allowed again with facemasks and teams respecting rule of 6 yes, delivering leaflets also back on
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
If you dont like their conditions of service, go elsewhere or even set up your own business.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
What I'm saying is that if a firm is free to say a shirt must be worn, if a firm is free to say trainers can't be worn, then they should be free to say that masks must be. If they choose to do so that's their free choice.
Saying that firms are not permitted to require it is every bit as illiberal as saying that firms must require it.
If firms "virtue signal" in a way their customers dislike they'll lose business to those that don't. Their choice.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
If you dont like their conditions of service, go elsewhere or even set up your own business.
That's basically what PT is saying and I see this logic but for me businesses are in danger of hampering our route from this mess and prolonging and projection fear along the way.
85% of DUP MLAs sign a letter calling for a leadership contest after they have been losing votes to the even more hardline Traditional Unionist Voice under Foster's leadership
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
We really are mistreating asylum seekers by putting them in Britannia hotels.
I don't see the funny side of people getting harassed. Whether asylum seekers or not.
Anyone engaged in this should be prosecuted. This is harassment not free speech.
It is also intimidation of the hotel and their guests. Banging on doors demanding to know who is in there could be construed as threatening behaviour or even assault. Trespass too. Who do these people think they are?
Far right tossers with the intellectual capability of an amoeba.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris. Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
I though our magnificent government had prohibited all canvassing in these elections. Was there a special dispensation for Conservative canvassers?
No prohibition once we had buried HRH.....
(And nobody told our LibDem opponent if there is!)
The thing about names that actually betray who they are. Good Law project is very rarely anything other than attempt to fight a culture war. Like the anti-fascists, a group of people who are as close to classical fascism as anything else in the west.
New - No 10 spokesman: “Any costs of wider refurbishment this year beyond those provided for by the annual allowance have been met by the PM personally. Conservative Party funds are not being used for this”
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
We really are mistreating asylum seekers by putting them in Britannia hotels.
I don't see the funny side of people getting harassed. Whether asylum seekers or not.
Anyone engaged in this should be prosecuted. This is harassment not free speech.
It is also intimidation of the hotel and their guests. Banging on doors demanding to know who is in there could be construed as threatening behaviour or even assault. Trespass too. Who do these people think they are?
Far right tossers with the intellectual capability of an amoeba.
I mean, if you saw the Dorchester on the list. The effing Dorchester for goodness sake. Either its the Daily Mail's story of the century or its a ruse.
About as relevant as polling whether we'd like it to be sunny or rain tomorrow. Where's Andrew?
Andrew is now up to 10% approval from 7% approval last month, 79% disapprove so he has closed the gap with Meghan as the most unpopular royal (or ex royal)
"he has closed the gap with Meghan as the most unpopular royal"
Really? Andrew new -69% versus Meghan - 32%. Which leaves a "gap" of 37%.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
If you dont like their conditions of service, go elsewhere or even set up your own business.
That's basically what PT is saying and I see this logic but for me businesses are in danger of hampering our route from this mess and prolonging and projection fear along the way.
It's not the state's job to tell businesses how to act.
That's on their owners, managers, staff and customers.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
What I'm saying is that if a firm is free to say a shirt must be worn, if a firm is free to say trainers can't be worn, then they should be free to say that masks must be. If they choose to do so that's their free choice.
Saying that firms are not permitted to require it is every bit as illiberal as saying that firms must require it.
If firms "virtue signal" in a way their customers dislike they'll lose business to those that don't. Their choice.
I get you - you are forwarding a libertarian point of view and giving corporate entities equal weighting re liberties with individual actors. This is way more important than shirts and trainers though, PT.
Just talking your custom elsewhere is not sufficient in my view. I'd like the government at least to make it clear that restrictions are voluntary from 21 June and absolutely not required so that at least someone like me can challenge said businesses with some weight.
Did they ask about the Princess Royal as next sovereign?
Also - that is a massive anti-monarchy majority as the UK monarchy by definition involves male primogeniture.
It isn't, 63% want to keep the monarchy to only 20% who want a republic in the poll plus male primogeniture was abolished by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013
The universe is only 13billion years old. It's actually still very young considering its supposed to go on for several trillion years yet. The earth is 4.5 billion years old, and life evolved fairly early on, 3.7 billion years ago. However the first multicellular life took another few billion years to evolve after that, and we have only been around for a miniscule amount of time (and are still nowhere near colonising Mars let along interstellar space).
Additionally, our Solar system is actually somewhat rare - most Stars are red dwarfs and few solar systems we've discovered so far resemble anything like ours. So we may be overestimating how many habitable planets there really are.
Considering our planet has been around for a third of the entire lifetime of the universe and we are the closest it's come to intelligent life, it doesn't seem that implausible that while primitive life is everywhere, we are one of the most advanced, or that other advanced races are not yet so far ahead of us that they can freely travel galaxies etc.
That doesn’t make any sense, given that the pace of human scientific advances has taken place in a millisecond in relation to galactic time. Consider the pace of scientific advance in the last 500 years, actually accelerating through that period, and project forward another 500 or 1000. If there is life somewhere else just this minute fraction of time ahead, we would be primitives by comparison.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
If you dont like their conditions of service, go elsewhere or even set up your own business.
That's basically what PT is saying and I see this logic but for me businesses are in danger of hampering our route from this mess and prolonging and projection fear along the way.
It's not the state's job to tell businesses how to act.
That's on their owners, managers, staff and customers.
I'm more tolerant of state intervention in the market than you are and it is this ideological difference that separates us I think.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
I'm not buying that. If you can send unmanned probes to other systems with expectations of collecting useful data, you can also equip them with enough decision making protocols to stay out of range until you've figured out how good the life you're about to discover is at spotting your tech. Anyway, if this was true then a thousand amateurs would also have spotted the probes by now, not just the US military.
Also, given the convergent evolution on Earth wrt sight, I think it's a good bet that alien lifeforms would "see" the same way.
It's a bit silly to think that civilisations capable of interstellar travel wouldn't image across the EM spectrum.
New - No 10 spokesman: “Any costs of wider refurbishment this year beyond those provided for by the annual allowance have been met by the PM personally. Conservative Party funds are not being used for this”
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
What I'm saying is that if a firm is free to say a shirt must be worn, if a firm is free to say trainers can't be worn, then they should be free to say that masks must be. If they choose to do so that's their free choice.
Saying that firms are not permitted to require it is every bit as illiberal as saying that firms must require it.
If firms "virtue signal" in a way their customers dislike they'll lose business to those that don't. Their choice.
I get you - you are forwarding a libertarian point of view and giving corporate entities equal weighting re liberties with individual actors. This is way more important than shirts and trainers though, PT.
Just talking your custom elsewhere is not sufficient in my view. I'd like the government at least to make it clear that restrictions are voluntary from 21 June and absolutely not required so that at least someone like me can challenge said businesses with some weight.
Challenge them how? Arguing with staff is about the least productive and rudest way to deal with most premises.
An email that you intend to take your business elsewhere will tend to be much more productive.
Are we still using the phrase fully vaccinated given how efficacious the vaccines are even after one dose? Comparing how many people are protected is more important.
It's the standard terminology.
But remember that those stats are actually 25% more as adults are only 80% of the population.
Are they counting those who had COVID and one shot as fully vaccinated?
Haha, he is a remainer, just like all of Boris Johnsons family!
You have a remainer's decor! I’ll wager your flat has never been used as a rowing-boat. I’ll wager it’s never had sixteen shipwrecked mariners (leavers from Hartlepool) tossing in it. (with apols to Blackadder)
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
I'm not buying that. If you can send unmanned probes to other systems with expectations of collecting useful data, you can also equip them with enough decision making protocols to stay out of range until you've figured out how good the life you're about to discover is at spotting your tech. Anyway, if this was true then a thousand amateurs would also have spotted the probes by now, not just the US military.
Also, given the convergent evolution on Earth wrt sight, I think it's a good bet that alien lifeforms would "see" the same way.
Amateurs can only spot big things or near things; no earth based telescope can see any of the stuff we left on the moon. And you would expect probes to be competently stealthed.
Any society that has such advanced technology that they are able to travel between Soler systems or even galaxies is not going to be very impressed with human nuclear weapons.
If such a society exists and has observed us, they probably regard us as we regard for example, fleas and ticks.
We are a form of pest that could easily be eradicated should the need arise.
Did they ask about the Princess Royal as next sovereign?
Also - that is a massive anti-monarchy majority as the UK monarchy by definition involves male primogeniture.
It isn't, 63% want to keep the monarchy to only 20% who want a republic in the poll plus male primogeniture was abolished by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013
OK, primogeniture alone - but anyone against the present Duke of Rothesay as heir is stil by definition against the monarchy full stop. You can't just pick and choose the latest celeb royal from Hello.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris. Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
I though our magnificent government had prohibited all canvassing in these elections. Was there a special dispensation for Conservative canvassers?
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I almost with you.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
What you are basically saying is that businesses should be able to prescribe their own rules, including attire and perhaps even seeking medical information, even when such requirements are not legally required. Liberal democracy? What about minority view, when that minority view is perfectly legal?
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
What I'm saying is that if a firm is free to say a shirt must be worn, if a firm is free to say trainers can't be worn, then they should be free to say that masks must be. If they choose to do so that's their free choice.
Saying that firms are not permitted to require it is every bit as illiberal as saying that firms must require it.
If firms "virtue signal" in a way their customers dislike they'll lose business to those that don't. Their choice.
I get you - you are forwarding a libertarian point of view and giving corporate entities equal weighting re liberties with individual actors. This is way more important than shirts and trainers though, PT.
Just talking your custom elsewhere is not sufficient in my view. I'd like the government at least to make it clear that restrictions are voluntary from 21 June and absolutely not required so that at least someone like me can challenge said businesses with some weight.
Challenge them how? Arguing with staff is about the least productive and rudest way to deal with most premises.
An email that you intend to take your business elsewhere will tend to be much more productive.
I wouldn't argue with anyone like that. Yes, an email would be the route.
Did they ask about the Princess Royal as next sovereign?
Also - that is a massive anti-monarchy majority as the UK monarchy by definition involves male primogeniture.
It isn't, 63% want to keep the monarchy to only 20% who want a republic in the poll plus male primogeniture was abolished by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013
OK, primogeniture alone - but anyone against the present Duke of Rothesay as heir is stil by definition against the monarchy full stop. You can't just pick and choose the latest celeb royal from Hello.
Wrong, Charles has a net +25% rating overall (far bigger than his lead over William as next King) and even in Scotland Charles is now on +10%
Tucker Carlson is now telling his audience to harass people who wear face masks outside.
If they see children wearing masks, Tucker says the response should be no different than when you see a kid being abused -- "call the police immediately, contact child protective services"
Did they ask about the Princess Royal as next sovereign?
Also - that is a massive anti-monarchy majority as the UK monarchy by definition involves male primogeniture.
It isn't, 63% want to keep the monarchy to only 20% who want a republic in the poll plus male primogeniture was abolished by the Succession to the Crown Act 2013
OK, primogeniture alone - but anyone against the present Duke of Rothesay as heir is stil by definition against the monarchy full stop.
No, it means people don't think about things when they answer survey questions.
Rather than extrapolate whether people support the monarchy or not from other questions, a direct question of if they do seems a bit more straightforward. What the former may indicate is that the latter figure could change when there is a new monarch as support may be softer.
Haha, he is a remainer, just like all of Boris Johnsons family!
You have a remainer's decor! I’ll wager your flat has never been used as a rowing-boat. I’ll wager it’s never had sixteen shipwrecked mariners (leavers from Hartlepool) tossing in it. (with apols to Blackadder)
And clearly one who has moved on with his life - unlike you..
Tucker Carlson is now telling his audience to harass people who wear face masks outside.
If they see children wearing masks, Tucker says the response should be no different than when you see a kid being abused -- "call the police immediately, contact child protective services"
Comments
And unfortunately our failure to help out other countries is likely to lead to new variants as well as devastation in places like India.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/30/who-urges-britain-to-pause-covid-jabs-after-treating-vulnerable
Could explain the hairstyle, I suppose.
There should be no legal restrictions and businesses should make their own choice that suits their own customers and their own needs.
If businesses customers don't want masks etc then it will be good business not to demand them.
But I don't think anyone should be "called out". It should be private choice. If a premise wants to go slower, for whatever reason, then so long as it's their choice then I respect that. I may shop elsewhere but there's no reason to call them out, be harsh on TripAdvisor or anything else so long as they're clear and upfront about expectation.
The overwhelming majority of businesses should and will do what the customers want.
I therefore conclude that it was all a ploy to secure Liberal support among the feminist/me too (and, I admit, historically ignorant) generations half a century later.
Does that qualify for British History? Andrew Lloyd-Webber & Tim Rice are both Brits.
My local mass centre is still running from 8am to 10pm. But they are not running at capacity for lanes - but they have space set out for 30 lanes, which is a *lot* as there is another centre at the district hospital, and whatever else there is in Pharmacies etc.
https://twitter.com/roger_scully/status/1386927518712623110
If referendum on 'membership of the EU, how would you vote?'
Join 40%
Stay Outside 41%
Would not vote 8%
Don't Know 10%
Refused to say 2%
If referendum on Wales becoming an independent country:
Yes 22%
No 54%
Would not vote 8%
Don't Know 14%
Refused to say 2%
If referendum on abolishing Senedd:
Yes 25%
No 46%
Would not vote 9%
Don't Know 17%
Refused to say 3%
The £200k refurbishment of the flat in No 11 was actually part of an anti-surveillance sweep in response to the lizard people threat, and the reason for Johnson's often incoherent "er er er ers" is a result of aliens trying to interfere with his speech patterns with a German manufactured sonic ray gun that is designed to make Boris tell lies, something he is uniquely immune to.
Would have happened but for Brexit.
I think I was on course for my GCMG as well.
An anomaly over New Guinea wouldn't be.
Can those with experience of two year olds let me know how practical this is ?
His approach to covid over the winter took enormous courage and was executed in the face of huge pressure. He started from the assumption he was a conservative and looked at what he could do given his principles. As a result his state is powering ahead economically, is much freer than others and excess deaths are no higher (in many cases lower) than other states.
He has the priceless ability to ignore the screeches of the mainstream media and its cohorts when he does something they don't like. Indeed he is one of those conservatives who thinks the louder they are screeching, the better I'm doing.
He is everything Boris Johnson is not, and when he comes to greater prominence as he surely will, his example will cast Johnson's conservatives in a very poor light. Also he appears unencumbered by the fragile ego that so hit Trump.
The Queen now at +76%, William at +68%, Kate at +67%, Charles at +25%, Harry at -6% and Meghan at -32%.
No D of E this time for obvious sad reasons
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1387063461188980748?s=20
Edit: the masks, not the two year olds
As for my knighthood there was more chance of me proselytising about the awesomeness of pineapple on pizza.
In hindsight I should have asked during the coalition years.
Utterly delusional.
Where's Andrew?
Also, given the convergent evolution on Earth wrt sight, I think it's a good bet that alien lifeforms would "see" the same way.
The far-right group Britain First has been duped into protesting outside hotels which do not contain asylum seekers after being supplied with a fake list including the Dorchester on Park Lane, London, and a pub hotel owned by an associate of Dominic Cummings.
Supporters of Britain First last year entered hotels used by the Home Office to accommodate asylum seekers and started banging on bedroom doors and antagonising the asylum seekers there.
They are now resuming these hotel visits and put out an appeal to members of the public to give them the names of hotels where they knew asylum seekers were being accommodated.
Pro-migrant groups responded in droves. About 600 people contacted Britain First provided the names of decoy hotels.
Britain First’s leader, Paul Golding, and chair, Ashlea Simon, put out a video on social media indicating that they had not realised that they had been bombarded with fake hotel names by opponents.
Simon said they had received a long list of hotel names from members of the public and had started to visit them. She can be seen holding the list. Speaking to camera she said: “When we visited these hotels we were met with empty rooms. No illegal immigrants.”
Pro–migrant groups have hailed the stunt sending the far right on a wild goose chase as a success.
One member of a pro-migrant group, who only wished to be identified by their twitter handle, Marsh4LL, said: “Paul Golding put out a request via the Britain First website so I contacted every like-minded person that I know to bombard Paul and Ashlea with as many hotel addresses in the north-west that had zero connections with housing asylum seekers and it worked a treat. They were most definitely taken in by this.”
The Britain First hotel incident comes as far-right watchers report an increase in far-right activity at hotels believed to be accommodating asylum seekers. Although Britain First supporters visited some of the hotels on the fake list they have also been visiting hotels which do contain asylum seekers.
Police were called to one Nottingham hotel on 17 April when supporters of Britain First entered and went from hotel room to hotel room demanding to know if the occupants of the rooms were asylum seekers and which countries they had come from.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/27/britain-first-duped-into-protesting-at-hotels-with-no-asylum-seekers
We really are mistreating asylum seekers by putting them in Britannia hotels.
Seem about right
Which is a slight improvement on November 2019 when he had a positive rating of 7% and a negative rating of 82%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/op5ota7eih/The Times Royal Favourability.pdf
Anyone engaged in this should be prosecuted. This is harassment not free speech.
But we know they are now not "being" used, the q is were they ever used?
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1387068205575938052
What will happen is that the raft of commercial virtue-signalling will endure when it need not and fear will endure in the community when it need not.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/yZ_Z6-JpSumc02m2QnQr4A
You might also remember the Doctor Who episode, The Empty Child.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snFuvXMErSM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0074ds9/doctor-who-series-1-9-the-empty-child?seriesId=b007vvcq
Who do these people think they are?
Saying that firms are not permitted to require it is every bit as illiberal as saying that firms must require it.
If firms "virtue signal" in a way their customers dislike they'll lose business to those that don't. Their choice.
https://twitter.com/SJAMcBride/status/1387062909935755265?s=20
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14775366/france-generals-macron-ousted-coup-islamists/
WTF?
(And nobody told our LibDem opponent if there is!)
https://twitter.com/BBCLookNorth/status/1386968543271522308
Also - that is a massive anti-monarchy majority as the UK monarchy by definition involves male primogeniture.
Like the anti-fascists, a group of people who are as close to classical fascism as anything else in the west.
Really? Andrew new -69% versus Meghan - 32%. Which leaves a "gap" of 37%.
That's on their owners, managers, staff and customers.
Just talking your custom elsewhere is not sufficient in my view. I'd like the government at least to make it clear that restrictions are voluntary from 21 June and absolutely not required so that at least someone like me can challenge said businesses with some weight.
Along with more exotic stuff.
The Agnatic Cognatic element was abolished a few years ago.
To answer the question, were Conservative Party funds EVER paid out, loaned or anything else for the refurbishment of No. 10?
Definitely does sound like the Tory leader is channeling the ghost of Ron Ziegler . . .
An email that you intend to take your business elsewhere will tend to be much more productive.
You have a remainer's decor! I’ll wager your flat has never been used as a rowing-boat. I’ll wager it’s never had sixteen shipwrecked mariners (leavers from Hartlepool) tossing in it. (with apols to Blackadder)
If such a society exists and has observed us, they probably regard us as we regard for example, fleas and ticks.
We are a form of pest that could easily be eradicated should the need arise.
and choose the latest celeb royal from Hello.
If they see children wearing masks, Tucker says the response should be no different than when you see a kid being abused -- "call the police immediately, contact child protective services"
https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/status/1386837979453399049
The video is worth a watch just to demonstrate how batshit crazy some people have become.
Rather than extrapolate whether people support the monarchy or not from other questions, a direct question of if they do seems a bit more straightforward. What the former may indicate is that the latter figure could change when there is a new monarch as support may be softer.