Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Local lockdowns by stealth – it is all looking rather chaotic – politicalbetting.com

1235»

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Covid - June 21st - a question.

    Does anyone understand what this date ACTUALLY means for the lifting of restrictions. There are lots of people commenting on the understanding that it effectively means no domestic restrictions after that date (or maybe a few things retained like masks on public transport).

    But this doesn't seem to align at all with what is actually happening. For example, the Government in conjunction with sporting bodies and others, is running "pilot events" - eg. latest is Eng-NZ test and Royal Ascot, apparently. But what are these "pilots" for? It's all very well saying that they are designed to inform how these events can run safely in the future, but what does that mean post June 21st? Post June 21st either things are happening with restrictions, or they aren't. And if they aren't, then what are the pilot events practicing for?

    I’m not sure how joined up a lot of this is. I too find the trial events challenging, because I don’t want to have to get a Covid test in the days leading up to going to a football match. I want to be able to go on the off chance. I am sure things have been learnt, but a lot of what will come out is bleeding obvious. If you test everyone before they go then of course few if any new cases will happen. I believe the government is heading to an advice not laws mode, not unlike the current situation in the Indian (sorry april02...) variant hot spots. This is going to challenge some, who will hate people who discard masks at the first possible moment (like me).
    No test was required at the footy on Sunday, though interestingly there were sniffer dogs. I have never seen these at a match. Drugs bombs or covid? Only the latter makes sense.
    Because you were able to get past with your drugs and bombs?
    I think it was his team's players that bombed.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    One of the key arguments used repeatedly against the Swedish approach to covid was that UK people basically weren't community minded enough to be trusted to take responsible action without draconian rules.

    Yet now ministers are saying they are issuing guidance not impositions to eight regions and asking people to be responsible and act in a sensible way.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 43,011

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    One of the key arguments used repeatedly against the Swedish approach to covid was that UK people basically weren't community minded enough to be trusted to take responsible action without draconian rules.

    Yet now ministers are saying they are issuing guidance not impositions to eight regions and asking people to be responsible and act in a sensible way.

    Now that the overall situation is much better it is a risk they probably feel more able to take.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 485
    I wonder when the UK's vaccine roll-out will stop being supply constrained and move onto a long tail of residual demand? With things down to 30-31 year olds this evening (booked in for tomorrow morning!) and them going through around 2 age groups a week, I suspect everyone 18+ will have been offered and had chance to book by 21 June. So perhaps July will just be mopping up anyone who wasn't quite so keen...

    In any case I'm looking forward to full normality. And fortunately, I can't see any justification for delaying things, nor do I think Boris will want to.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    rcs1000 said:


    Everything you do leaves digital footprints. And all the legislating in the world can't erase them - GPDR, the Data Protection Act, etc. are all bandaids on the fact that in a digital world someone is always going to know where you are.

    Instead of being frightened by that, embrace it.

    That's a seductive line of reasoning but it relies on the relative benevolence or ambivalence of organisations collecting your personal data.

    The ability to collect personal information doesn't equate to the requirement to do so - organisations can because they can. Simply nodding that aside as a function of technology is weak. There should be much more robust prescription against both the State and private organisations telling them what information they can capture, when they can capture it, how such information can and should be used and for how long it should be retained.

    I don't presume benevolence or ambivalence - that doesn't mean I presume malevolence either - but there's a strong argument too much information is being gathered too easily without adequate safeguards (the odd privacy notice here or there or a note in some legalistic small print doesn't really cut it) or accountability. The use of Apps, the "tracking" of individuals via their phones can be justified but that doesn't make it right.

    The wider issue is whether the individual is entitled to a degree of privacy from the State or from private enterprise (in 1984, it was a telescreen, in 2021, it's a mobile phone but is there in truth much difference?). In what way does the State or capitalism have a right to know where I am, what I'm doing, where I'm going or what I have for lunch?
    Robert's business depends on the collection of personal data so he does have an interest here.
    To be fair, it's a pretty explicit trade: let us track your driving and save (on average) $500 a year on your auto insurance. For anyone earning less than about $120,000/year, that's a fairly easy calculation to make.
    Blimey - is car insurance considerably more expensive in the USA than the UK ?
    My last few renewals have been around £200 or so.
    Yes, average car insurance rates are about $1,300/year. (In Michigan average rates above $3,000)
    Why is it that in Michigan?

    Ridiculous regulations.

    Which push up the cost of insurance.

    Which then result in large numbers (around one-in-five) of vehicles on the road without insurance.

    Which means that everyone else's rates rise because if you are involved in an accident with an uninsured vehicle, then your insurance is going to be paying.
    Presumably also a factor is that the USA's litigous system is even worse than our own?
    It is certainly the case that medical indemnity insurance varies tremendously from State to state. Sometimes to the point that services are not cost effective in some states. Neonatal paediatrics in California is so litigious that it is impossible to staff.
    The underlying problem here is that there is no universal healthcare. So, if you get and your insurance wheedles its way out of paying, or you simply can't work going forward and so don't have any health insurance any more, you have no choice but to litigate. It's a vicious circle: increased litigation leads to increased medical defence costs for medical staff leads to medical staff demanding higher pay leads to higher healthcare costs leads to increased litigation.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Thread on Scottish attitudes toward immigration:

    https://twitter.com/deanmthomson/status/1397169758907273216?s=21

    tl:dr “more or less the same as English attitudes”, despite what the SNP would have you believe.

    Scotland is, of course, vastly morally superior to the savage territory to the South, and would be delighted to welcome all the refugees and hand car wash attendants of the world, if only the Evil Tories would let it!

    And this would obviously be no different even if it weren't the case that 99.99% of them could be relied on to stay there for only so long as was necessary to scrape together the cost of a one-way coach ticket to London.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822

    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Covid - June 21st - a question.

    Does anyone understand what this date ACTUALLY means for the lifting of restrictions. There are lots of people commenting on the understanding that it effectively means no domestic restrictions after that date (or maybe a few things retained like masks on public transport).

    But this doesn't seem to align at all with what is actually happening. For example, the Government in conjunction with sporting bodies and others, is running "pilot events" - eg. latest is Eng-NZ test and Royal Ascot, apparently. But what are these "pilots" for? It's all very well saying that they are designed to inform how these events can run safely in the future, but what does that mean post June 21st? Post June 21st either things are happening with restrictions, or they aren't. And if they aren't, then what are the pilot events practicing for?

    I’m not sure how joined up a lot of this is. I too find the trial events challenging, because I don’t want to have to get a Covid test in the days leading up to going to a football match. I want to be able to go on the off chance. I am sure things have been learnt, but a lot of what will come out is bleeding obvious. If you test everyone before they go then of course few if any new cases will happen. I believe the government is heading to an advice not laws mode, not unlike the current situation in the Indian (sorry april02...) variant hot spots. This is going to challenge some, who will hate people who discard masks at the first possible moment (like me).
    No test was required at the footy on Sunday, though interestingly there were sniffer dogs. I have never seen these at a match. Drugs bombs or covid? Only the latter makes sense.
    That’s great to hear, and interesting in the context of dogs/Covid in the news in the last few days. Btw, very jealous of your cup win. In the 90’s it definitely felt like Leicester and Swindon were similar clubs, but our trajectories have been a bit different since...
    I was surprised that we won the cup. Too many players carrying injuries. We played a lot of games this season. We would have won if Evans or Fofana were fit. Kane was in his pocket until Fofana went off. For a twenty year old he is incredible.

    But fame is fleeting. I wouldn't be surprised to be in a relegation battle one season. Supporting Leicester is a real roller coaster, but you have to be there for the lows if you want to appreciate the highs.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 43,011
    ydoethur said:

    Of course, we shouldn’t forget the whole numbering system is rather artificial anyway. After all, there have been eleven Kings of England called Edward, but regnal numbers only observe eight. Similarly, almost nobody talks of ‘Mary II’ even though England had two Queen Marys - 1553-58 and 1688-1694. It’s not even good enough to say one is known by her husband’s name as well, because technically Mary I was a joint monarch of England with Phillip II of Spain.

    But only for a couple of years (1556-58).
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    Not at all the same thing. So there.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    One of my favourite things about the Protectorate was how when it tried creating an upper chamber, it spent most if not all of its brief initial run trying to figure out what it should be called.

    I recall a survey on Lib Dem Voice once about what a second chamber should be called, should it become appointed - while I personally think we should retain the name House of Lords in that scenario, I suggested 'The Other Place', as I think that would be quite funny given the traditions of Parliament in how the Lords and Commons refer to each other.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    Pagan2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    rcs1000 said:


    Everything you do leaves digital footprints. And all the legislating in the world can't erase them - GPDR, the Data Protection Act, etc. are all bandaids on the fact that in a digital world someone is always going to know where you are.

    Instead of being frightened by that, embrace it.

    That's a seductive line of reasoning but it relies on the relative benevolence or ambivalence of organisations collecting your personal data.

    The ability to collect personal information doesn't equate to the requirement to do so - organisations can because they can. Simply nodding that aside as a function of technology is weak. There should be much more robust prescription against both the State and private organisations telling them what information they can capture, when they can capture it, how such information can and should be used and for how long it should be retained.

    I don't presume benevolence or ambivalence - that doesn't mean I presume malevolence either - but there's a strong argument too much information is being gathered too easily without adequate safeguards (the odd privacy notice here or there or a note in some legalistic small print doesn't really cut it) or accountability. The use of Apps, the "tracking" of individuals via their phones can be justified but that doesn't make it right.

    The wider issue is whether the individual is entitled to a degree of privacy from the State or from private enterprise (in 1984, it was a telescreen, in 2021, it's a mobile phone but is there in truth much difference?). In what way does the State or capitalism have a right to know where I am, what I'm doing, where I'm going or what I have for lunch?
    I make no presumptions regarding benevolence or otherwise.

    My point is a much simpler one. What is known, cannot ever be truly unknown. Once the knowledge genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in.

    You can force, through regulations, firms to not use data in certain ways, or to use it only in others.

    But the reality is that none of these regulations moves the needle more than a smidgen. Because once knowledge exists, then organisations (commercial or governmental) will find ways to use it.

    Final point: every one of us could be massively more privacy conscious than we are. We could all use TOR to access politicalbetting. And we could use individual email addresses and usernames based around random sets of characters hosted with someone like Protonmail for each service we use. We could disable location services on our phones. We could keep our cash as... errr.. cash.

    There a million ways people could increase their privacy. Yet people *choose* to use Gmail, even though they know Google is reading their emails so they can target advertising better to them. Simply: it's easier.

    So, I reject the 'oh we must regulate' crowd. Firstly, because those regulations are incredibly burdensome for business without actually improving privacy. And secondly, because consumer can choose privacy over convenience today. They have that option, and if they choose not to, why should the government force them?
    You cannot use Tor to access political betting. I know have tried. I do use tor all I can. I do use throwaway email address for every fora though. I dont carry a phone, I dont own a car, I use cash as much as possible.I dont use facebook/twitter/whatsapp etc. Personal emails I encrypt. I suspect my digital footprint is lower than most. I don't advocate everyone does this I merely say I protect my privacy as much as I can and others can choose how much they protect theirs.
    But you are the ONLY person in the universe who inherited a dead language as a spoken mother tongue! You are an anthropological Holy Grail, rival death squads of psycholinguistic hit-men will be on your case, to rub you out, or spirit you to safety, depending on whether you threaten their worldview. You're like the Holy Blood in the Da Vinci Code

    I imagine they are prowling your street right this minute, detecting the air for a hint of fresh-baked pasty
  • glwglw Posts: 8,876

    All of that behaviour has probably put you on a watch list, and the intelligence services know more about your movements than those of the rest of us put together.

    You are almost certainly correct.

    I remember once reading an article on cryptome.org (which is an aggregator/publisher of privacy, security, intelligence, and cryptography news) and it basically said "people who visit cryptome.org are put on an NSA watchlist". D'oh!
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,570
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Covid - June 21st - a question.

    Does anyone understand what this date ACTUALLY means for the lifting of restrictions. There are lots of people commenting on the understanding that it effectively means no domestic restrictions after that date (or maybe a few things retained like masks on public transport).

    But this doesn't seem to align at all with what is actually happening. For example, the Government in conjunction with sporting bodies and others, is running "pilot events" - eg. latest is Eng-NZ test and Royal Ascot, apparently. But what are these "pilots" for? It's all very well saying that they are designed to inform how these events can run safely in the future, but what does that mean post June 21st? Post June 21st either things are happening with restrictions, or they aren't. And if they aren't, then what are the pilot events practicing for?

    I’m not sure how joined up a lot of this is. I too find the trial events challenging, because I don’t want to have to get a Covid test in the days leading up to going to a football match. I want to be able to go on the off chance. I am sure things have been learnt, but a lot of what will come out is bleeding obvious. If you test everyone before they go then of course few if any new cases will happen. I believe the government is heading to an advice not laws mode, not unlike the current situation in the Indian (sorry april02...) variant hot spots. This is going to challenge some, who will hate people who discard masks at the first possible moment (like me).
    No test was required at the footy on Sunday, though interestingly there were sniffer dogs. I have never seen these at a match. Drugs bombs or covid? Only the latter makes sense.
    That’s great to hear, and interesting in the context of dogs/Covid in the news in the last few days. Btw, very jealous of your cup win. In the 90’s it definitely felt like Leicester and Swindon were similar clubs, but our trajectories have been a bit different since...
    I was surprised that we won the cup. Too many players carrying injuries. We played a lot of games this season. We would have won if Evans or Fofana were fit. Kane was in his pocket until Fofana went off. For a twenty year old he is incredible.

    But fame is fleeting. I wouldn't be surprised to be in a relegation battle one season. Supporting Leicester is a real roller coaster, but you have to be there for the lows if you want to appreciate the highs.
    If I’d known that 1993-1994 was the high point I’d have made more of an effort to go to the Swindon premiership games. New motto “it can always get worse”
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    edited May 2021
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Covid - June 21st - a question.

    Does anyone understand what this date ACTUALLY means for the lifting of restrictions. There are lots of people commenting on the understanding that it effectively means no domestic restrictions after that date (or maybe a few things retained like masks on public transport).

    But this doesn't seem to align at all with what is actually happening. For example, the Government in conjunction with sporting bodies and others, is running "pilot events" - eg. latest is Eng-NZ test and Royal Ascot, apparently. But what are these "pilots" for? It's all very well saying that they are designed to inform how these events can run safely in the future, but what does that mean post June 21st? Post June 21st either things are happening with restrictions, or they aren't. And if they aren't, then what are the pilot events practicing for?

    I’m not sure how joined up a lot of this is. I too find the trial events challenging, because I don’t want to have to get a Covid test in the days leading up to going to a football match. I want to be able to go on the off chance. I am sure things have been learnt, but a lot of what will come out is bleeding obvious. If you test everyone before they go then of course few if any new cases will happen. I believe the government is heading to an advice not laws mode, not unlike the current situation in the Indian (sorry april02...) variant hot spots. This is going to challenge some, who will hate people who discard masks at the first possible moment (like me).
    No test was required at the footy on Sunday, though interestingly there were sniffer dogs. I have never seen these at a match. Drugs bombs or covid? Only the latter makes sense.
    That’s great to hear, and interesting in the context of dogs/Covid in the news in the last few days. Btw, very jealous of your cup win. In the 90’s it definitely felt like Leicester and Swindon were similar clubs, but our trajectories have been a bit different since...
    I was surprised that we won the cup. Too many players carrying injuries. We played a lot of games this season. We would have won if Evans or Fofana were fit. Kane was in his pocket until Fofana went off. For a twenty year old he is incredible.

    But fame is fleeting. I wouldn't be surprised to be in a relegation battle one season. Supporting Leicester is a real roller coaster, but you have to be there for the lows if you want to appreciate the highs.
    If I’d known that 1993-1994 was the high point I’d have made more of an effort to go to the Swindon premiership games. New motto “it can always get worse”
    For the club or Swindon in general?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    One of the key arguments used repeatedly against the Swedish approach to covid was that UK people basically weren't community minded enough to be trusted to take responsible action without draconian rules.

    Yet now ministers are saying they are issuing guidance not impositions to eight regions and asking people to be responsible and act in a sensible way.

    One would hope that 61,420,928 vaccinations and counting would change the risk profile somewhat.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 43,011
    edited May 2021

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    Not at all the same thing. So there.
    The Protectorate was the period during the Commonwealth (or, to monarchists, the Interregnum) during which England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the English overseas possessions were governed by a Lord Protector as a republic.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,570
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    Covid - June 21st - a question.

    Does anyone understand what this date ACTUALLY means for the lifting of restrictions. There are lots of people commenting on the understanding that it effectively means no domestic restrictions after that date (or maybe a few things retained like masks on public transport).

    But this doesn't seem to align at all with what is actually happening. For example, the Government in conjunction with sporting bodies and others, is running "pilot events" - eg. latest is Eng-NZ test and Royal Ascot, apparently. But what are these "pilots" for? It's all very well saying that they are designed to inform how these events can run safely in the future, but what does that mean post June 21st? Post June 21st either things are happening with restrictions, or they aren't. And if they aren't, then what are the pilot events practicing for?

    I’m not sure how joined up a lot of this is. I too find the trial events challenging, because I don’t want to have to get a Covid test in the days leading up to going to a football match. I want to be able to go on the off chance. I am sure things have been learnt, but a lot of what will come out is bleeding obvious. If you test everyone before they go then of course few if any new cases will happen. I believe the government is heading to an advice not laws mode, not unlike the current situation in the Indian (sorry april02...) variant hot spots. This is going to challenge some, who will hate people who discard masks at the first possible moment (like me).
    No test was required at the footy on Sunday, though interestingly there were sniffer dogs. I have never seen these at a match. Drugs bombs or covid? Only the latter makes sense.
    That’s great to hear, and interesting in the context of dogs/Covid in the news in the last few days. Btw, very jealous of your cup win. In the 90’s it definitely felt like Leicester and Swindon were similar clubs, but our trajectories have been a bit different since...
    I was surprised that we won the cup. Too many players carrying injuries. We played a lot of games this season. We would have won if Evans or Fofana were fit. Kane was in his pocket until Fofana went off. For a twenty year old he is incredible.

    But fame is fleeting. I wouldn't be surprised to be in a relegation battle one season. Supporting Leicester is a real roller coaster, but you have to be there for the lows if you want to appreciate the highs.
    If I’d known that 1993-1994 was the high point I’d have made more of an effort to go to the Swindon premiership games. New motto “it can always get worse”
    For the club or Swindon in general?
    I meant the club, but tbh it works for both... I was born there, but I don’t live there, for a lot of reasons!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Armed cops murdering restrained people extrajudicially is Evil.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    I don't think he said otherwise, did he? That it doesn't matter if he was good or bad means, when the history is written a long time from now, analysis of the portrayals, the icon, could be quite fascinating- we already know victims are often demonised as well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    Not at all the same thing. So there.
    The Protectorate was the period during the Commonwealth (or, to monarchists, the Interregnum) during which England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the English overseas possessions were governed by a Lord Protector as a republic.
    Doesn't change that what you said was wrong. This is pedantic betting dot com. You should have said these islands were a republic long before 1707.

    Though I'd argue the interregnum was not 'long before' 1707. If people alive at the time were still alive in 1707, it wasn't that long!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103

    Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
    @ChariteBerlin
    Replying to
    @ChariteBerlin
    Large #CharitéBerlin study by @c_drosten and team, now published in @ScienceMagazine
    , shows: #SARSCoV2 infectivity similar across all age groups.

    #CharitéVirology
    @DZIF_

    https://twitter.com/ChariteBerlin/status/1397205464526598159
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 555
    Ratters said:

    I wonder when the UK's vaccine roll-out will stop being supply constrained and move onto a long tail of residual demand? With things down to 30-31 year olds this evening (booked in for tomorrow morning!) and them going through around 2 age groups a week, I suspect everyone 18+ will have been offered and had chance to book by 21 June. So perhaps July will just be mopping up anyone who wasn't quite so keen...

    There'll be a lot of second-jabs still to be doing in July, I expect, so unless supply opens up a lot the bulk of it will be needed for that, surely?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    One of my favourite things about the Protectorate was how when it tried creating an upper chamber, it spent most if not all of its brief initial run trying to figure out what it should be called.

    I recall a survey on Lib Dem Voice once about what a second chamber should be called, should it become appointed - while I personally think we should retain the name House of Lords in that scenario, I suggested 'The Other Place', as I think that would be quite funny given the traditions of Parliament in how the Lords and Commons refer to each other.
    There was a religious aspect to the debate. It is a fairly mainstream Puritan view that there is only one Lord.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    One of my favourite things about the Protectorate was how when it tried creating an upper chamber, it spent most if not all of its brief initial run trying to figure out what it should be called.

    I recall a survey on Lib Dem Voice once about what a second chamber should be called, should it become appointed - while I personally think we should retain the name House of Lords in that scenario, I suggested 'The Other Place', as I think that would be quite funny given the traditions of Parliament in how the Lords and Commons refer to each other.
    There was a religious aspect to the debate. It is a fairly mainstream Puritan view that there is only one Lord.
    There was a religious aspect to most of their debates in fairness. People should read the accounts, it's amusing for how much we might recognise - people quibbling over procedure and what powers the chamber has, random motions and trivial stuff like petitions, arguing over what committee to send things to, the Speaker pointedly ignoring some people etc.

    Granted I've not seen the Commons take significant time out to put someone on trial for High Blasphemy, but give it time.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    pm215 said:

    Ratters said:

    I wonder when the UK's vaccine roll-out will stop being supply constrained and move onto a long tail of residual demand? With things down to 30-31 year olds this evening (booked in for tomorrow morning!) and them going through around 2 age groups a week, I suspect everyone 18+ will have been offered and had chance to book by 21 June. So perhaps July will just be mopping up anyone who wasn't quite so keen...

    There'll be a lot of second-jabs still to be doing in July, I expect, so unless supply opens up a lot the bulk of it will be needed for that, surely?
    Though wrapping up the second doses ought to be quite rapid, since there'd be negligible demand for first doses by that point.

    I'm already booked in for 26 June for my second, so seems safe to assume that almost all over 40s will also already be done (or at least eligible to be done) before July starts. So if by July there's no significant first doses left and there's only under-40s left to second dose (and some like myself will already be done) then there's going to really be no supply constraints.

    Instead people will be constrained by needing to wait long enough for the optimal gap between first second, instead of waiting because there's no doses available.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Armed cops murdering restrained people extrajudicially is Evil.
    Agreed.

    It is the demonising of people by race that disturbs me
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,808
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us.
    I think he was rather more flawed than 99% of us.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Armed cops murdering restrained people extrajudicially is Evil.
    Agreed.

    It is the demonising of people by race that disturbs me
    Me too.

    If people weren't demonised by race then George Floyd would still be alive and we wouldn't have heard this name.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    One of my favourite things about the Protectorate was how when it tried creating an upper chamber, it spent most if not all of its brief initial run trying to figure out what it should be called.

    I recall a survey on Lib Dem Voice once about what a second chamber should be called, should it become appointed - while I personally think we should retain the name House of Lords in that scenario, I suggested 'The Other Place', as I think that would be quite funny given the traditions of Parliament in how the Lords and Commons refer to each other.
    There was a religious aspect to the debate. It is a fairly mainstream Puritan view that there is only one Lord.
    There was a religious aspect to most of their debates in fairness. People should read the accounts, it's amusing for how much we might recognise - people quibbling over procedure and what powers the chamber has, random motions and trivial stuff like petitions, arguing over what committee to send things to, the Speaker pointedly ignoring some people etc.

    Granted I've not seen the Commons take significant time out to put someone on trial for High Blasphemy, but give it time.
    I thought that's what the 2017-19 Parliament was all about?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,506
    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us.
    I think he was rather more flawed than 99% of us.
    I think Leon might be using “the Royal us” ;)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 43,011
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    Not at all the same thing. So there.
    The Protectorate was the period during the Commonwealth (or, to monarchists, the Interregnum) during which England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the English overseas possessions were governed by a Lord Protector as a republic.
    Doesn't change that what you said was wrong. This is pedantic betting dot com. You should have said these islands were a republic long before 1707.

    Though I'd argue the interregnum was not 'long before' 1707. If people alive at the time were still alive in 1707, it wasn't that long!
    Roughly 50 years. What was average life expectancy in the 17th century?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    alex_ said:

    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us.
    I think he was rather more flawed than 99% of us.
    I think Leon might be using “the Royal us” ;)
    Yes, it occurs to me that I am probably closer to Floyd than many other PB-ers: on the Probably-Shouldn't-Have-Done-That spectrum
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829

    ydoethur said:

    Of course, we shouldn’t forget the whole numbering system is rather artificial anyway. After all, there have been eleven Kings of England called Edward, but regnal numbers only observe eight. Similarly, almost nobody talks of ‘Mary II’ even though England had two Queen Marys - 1553-58 and 1688-1694. It’s not even good enough to say one is known by her husband’s name as well, because technically Mary I was a joint monarch of England with Phillip II of Spain.

    But only for a couple of years (1556-58).
    Still counts. If by some chance Prince Edward succeeds, he'd be called Edward IX. Because there was a brief Edward VIII.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    Not at all the same thing. So there.
    The Protectorate was the period during the Commonwealth (or, to monarchists, the Interregnum) during which England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the English overseas possessions were governed by a Lord Protector as a republic.
    Doesn't change that what you said was wrong. This is pedantic betting dot com. You should have said these islands were a republic long before 1707.

    Though I'd argue the interregnum was not 'long before' 1707. If people alive at the time were still alive in 1707, it wasn't that long!
    Roughly 50 years. What was average life expectancy in the 17th century?
    Pretty good if you get through early childhood. That life expectancy is the average of a lot of some 70 year olds and lots of dead youngsters.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    edited May 2021

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Is Prince Billy and his missus having different titles north of the border the same as the Sun having entirely different headlines for their loyal Scotch readers?


    Jimmy 6 & 1 started the tradition. The latest generation are hardly likely to risk causing offence by ending a tradition established by a Scottish King.
    I'll believe that when granny starts using ER I when she stays at Balmoral
    Why would she be ER I?

    The tradition is they use the higher numeral, regardless of whether it is Scottish or English.
    That won't avert a fresh wave of outraged screaming when William ascends the throne (unless, of course, the Union is killed off beforehand. Or he picks a different name to get around the problem.)
    King Billy would be just fine, whatever the number
    Alright, but if we get a King Billy Bob at some point I'm going republican.
    If we get a King Billy Bob then the Republicans have probably taken over already.
    The UK was a Republic long before the 1707 Act of Union...
    The UK didn't exist until 1801.
    The Protectorate:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protectorate
    Not at all the same thing. So there.
    The Protectorate was the period during the Commonwealth (or, to monarchists, the Interregnum) during which England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the English overseas possessions were governed by a Lord Protector as a republic.
    Doesn't change that what you said was wrong. This is pedantic betting dot com. You should have said these islands were a republic long before 1707.

    Though I'd argue the interregnum was not 'long before' 1707. If people alive at the time were still alive in 1707, it wasn't that long!
    Roughly 50 years. What was average life expectancy in the 17th century?
    I don't know - what does that have to do with plenty of people living a lot longer than fifty years, and therefore my intentionally pedantic point of lots of people alive during the Republic still being alive in 1707 being true? Richard Cromwell made it to his mid 80s. Granted Charles I didn't make 50. Make it past childhood and you had a good shot.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us.
    I think he was rather more flawed than 99% of us.
    I think Leon might be using “the Royal us” ;)
    Yes, it occurs to me that I am probably closer to Floyd than many other PB-ers: on the Probably-Shouldn't-Have-Done-That spectrum
    Thankfully you're closer to us than him on the Not-Had-Cops-Kneel-On-Your-Neck-Until-You-Asphyxiate spectrum.

    I wonder how many of your prior escapades might have been much riskier if you were a poor black American instead of a white Brit?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited May 2021
    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    We have no idea of what the context was, I can imagine Boris saying something like that as a "joke". Remember the first academic paper (which the author regrets stating like this) said most people will only suffer mild cases and the high risk is to the over 80s...which everybody took to mean under 80, you probably get a bit of a cold, but the author actually meant everything up to needing hospital treatment.

    And early on there was lots of Western exceptionism....well the Chinese in Wuhan have very polluted high density environment, all smoke like chimneys, their lungs are knackered by the time they get a bit older and also despite this 1 in 10 in hospital, the gross number is very small...so they probably just not picking up the vast majority of cases.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    Ratters said:

    I wonder when the UK's vaccine roll-out will stop being supply constrained and move onto a long tail of residual demand? With things down to 30-31 year olds this evening (booked in for tomorrow morning!) and them going through around 2 age groups a week, I suspect everyone 18+ will have been offered and had chance to book by 21 June. So perhaps July will just be mopping up anyone who wasn't quite so keen...

    Has a disition been made on giving vaccine to be used on under 18s? 16 and 17 year olds in particular?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    Not by choice, presumably? As far as the robbers were concerned. And there's a difference between qualifying for God's mercy and qualifying for your own shrine.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822

    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us.
    I think he was rather more flawed than 99% of us.
    I think Leon might be using “the Royal us” ;)
    Yes, it occurs to me that I am probably closer to Floyd than many other PB-ers: on the Probably-Shouldn't-Have-Done-That spectrum
    Thankfully you're closer to us than him on the Not-Had-Cops-Kneel-On-Your-Neck-Until-You-Asphyxiate spectrum.

    I wonder how many of your prior escapades might have been much riskier if you were a poor black American instead of a white Brit?
    A very good question indeed, and the very definition of white privilege.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631

    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us.
    I think he was rather more flawed than 99% of us.
    I think Leon might be using “the Royal us” ;)
    Yes, it occurs to me that I am probably closer to Floyd than many other PB-ers: on the Probably-Shouldn't-Have-Done-That spectrum
    Thankfully you're closer to us than him on the Not-Had-Cops-Kneel-On-Your-Neck-Until-You-Asphyxiate spectrum.

    I wonder how many of your prior escapades might have been much riskier if you were a poor black American instead of a white Brit?
    Yes, I have often considered that. I'd surely be dead in America

    I should be dead in the UK, to be fair

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Muhammad did worse and nearly two billion worship him.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,506
    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    We have no idea of what the context was, I can imagine Boris saying something like that as a "joke". Remember the first academic paper (which the author regrets stating like this) said most people will only suffer mild cases and the high risk is to the over 80s...which everybody took to mean under 80, you probably get a bit of a cold, but the author actually meant everything up to needing hospital treatment.
    If it was a joke then revealing it amidst a list of supposedly serious criticisms (like him being slow to act because he was on holiday) is at best totally pointless (it lacks even the 'a bit of a racist joke' angle of Kung flu) and at worse a distraction from serious criticisms, and Boris and his allies will be able to use it to deflect from genuine criticisms. So either Cummings is an idiot or he's still secretly working for Boris.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,866
    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Just booked second vaccination

    9 weeks after first

    Congrats Scott! Boris has got you through the pandemic :D
    Truly, he shall come to be seen as Papa Boris, Father of the Nation.
    Father of an as yet to be determined number of people of this nation certainly
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    I for one am mightily relieved to learn that Jesus Christ the Son of God, did not, in fact, conspire with five disciples to commit Aggravated Robbery with a Deadly Weapon

    Though if he had I bet his Dad would have got him a *suspended sentence*

    I thangyoo. I'm here all week. Try the laksa
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 18,053
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    He only started the preaching malarkey at the age of 30. He might have been a right one before that.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    Not to forget that at that time the Prime Minister had just successfully negotiated a path through to Brexit, a previously insoluble problem that had completely destroyed his predecessor and dominated the past 4 years of British politics (some would say longer).

    The Health Secretary attending COBR at that point was entirely reasonable, that's what he's there for.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited May 2021
    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    In the early days of the pandemic, literally everybody miscalculated the potential problem....other than some crazy bloke on here who kept posting online video of old Chinese people collapsing in the street*.

    It was seen as that a terrible thing going on in Wuhan, we need to help and / or get our citizens out of there. Not, oh crap if it gets here it will be just as bad, or even is it already here....There was huge Western exceptionalism, which was the Chinese have worse health, heavily polluted cities and their healthcare just isn't as good.

    * - which to be fair probably saved my parents, as I got them locked down well in advance of measures coming in, as soon as I heard COVID was here.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    He only started the preaching malarkey at the age of 30. He might have been a right one before that.
    Given how some people are before they are born again, that seems quite plausible.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,481
    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    God, the mass murderer.

    See the Great Flood as a prime example.

    https://www.vocativ.com/news/309748/all-the-people-god-kills-in-the-bible/index.html
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    In the early days of the pandemic, literally everybody miscalculated the potential problem....other than some crazy bloke on here who kept posting online video of old Chinese people collapsing in the street.

    It was seen as that a terrible thing going on in Wuhan, we need to help and / or get our citizens out of there. Not, oh crap if it gets here it will be just as bad, or even is it already here....There was huge Western exceptionalism, which was the Chinese have worse health, heavily polluted cities and their healthcare just isn't as good.
    Which was reasonable to believe at first.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,054
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    Blimey how did we get here?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    He made a disciple of Matthew who extorted taxes on behalf of the Roman oppressors, blessed the Centurions servant who did much the same, made a prostitute one of his chief followers etc.

    The point is that we should never reject miscreants in humanity, but rather to seek to turn them away from their former lives and toward salvation.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    edited May 2021

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    In the early days of the pandemic, literally everybody miscalculated the potential problem....other than some crazy bloke on here who kept posting online video of old Chinese people collapsing in the street.

    It was seen as that a terrible thing going on in Wuhan, we need to help and / or get our citizens out of there. Not, oh crap if it gets here it will be just as bad, or even is it already here....There was huge Western exceptionalism, which was the Chinese have worse health, heavily polluted cities and their healthcare just isn't as good.
    Which was reasonable to believe at first.
    Well also, the big key thing we didn't know, the incubation period. SARS1 was bad, but basically you are only infection when you are in a bad way, and you aren't popping down the supermarket when you are in that state, you are in hospital.

    So I presume the Western authorities might well have thought, well if it is like SARS1, we learned the lessons from that, isolate people (which if you remember we were doing) and you can keep on top of it.

    The world didn't shut down for SARS1 or MERS. But obviously South Korea had been hit really hard by those, so they deployed the emergency procedures straight away.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Of course, we shouldn’t forget the whole numbering system is rather artificial anyway. After all, there have been eleven Kings of England called Edward, but regnal numbers only observe eight. Similarly, almost nobody talks of ‘Mary II’ even though England had two Queen Marys - 1553-58 and 1688-1694. It’s not even good enough to say one is known by her husband’s name as well, because technically Mary I was a joint monarch of England with Phillip II of Spain.

    But only for a couple of years (1556-58).
    Still counts. If by some chance Prince Edward succeeds, he'd be called Edward IX. Because there was a brief Edward VIII.
    Philip of Spain never being listed by historians as King Regnant of England is an interesting one. I can only assume that it's because, although he was recognised by Parliament as co-ruler during his wife's lifetime, he wasn't King by right but only through marriage, and therefore lost the title when she died.

    This is an altogether different situation from William III/II and Mary II after the Glorious Revolution, which was a genuine joint monarchy in which both parties were monarchs by right - hence the fact that William's reign continued uninterrupted after his wife's death (even though she was the (Protestant) Stuart successor following her father's deposition,) and therefore Queen Anne only ascended the throne when he also died.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    He made a disciple of Matthew who extorted taxes on behalf of the Roman oppressors, blessed the Centurions servant who did much the same, made a prostitute one of his chief followers etc.

    The point is that we should never reject miscreants in humanity, but rather to seek to turn them away from their former lives and toward salvation.
    Tax collectors are not criminals, and he was very clear that she had to be an ex-prostitute.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    Can I not have even a golf clap for the idea that Jesus went through his influential Dad to get a "suspended sentence"?

    That took WORK
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    God, the mass murderer.

    See the Great Flood as a prime example.

    https://www.vocativ.com/news/309748/all-the-people-god-kills-in-the-bible/index.html
    Don't even start on the book of Job. It makes Noah look like a children's tale.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,506

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    We have no idea of what the context was, I can imagine Boris saying something like that as a "joke". Remember the first academic paper (which the author regrets stating like this) said most people will only suffer mild cases and the high risk is to the over 80s...which everybody took to mean under 80, you probably get a bit of a cold, but the author actually meant everything up to needing hospital treatment.

    And early on there was lots of Western exceptionism....well the Chinese in Wuhan have very polluted high density environment, all smoke like chimneys, their lungs are knackered by the time they get a bit older and also despite this 1 in 10 in hospital, the gross number is very small...so they probably just not picking up the vast majority of cases.
    Of course the other point about comments like “harmful/mild to the over/under 80s” (and we’re still getting it now) is that, even when just referring to deaths it is not meant to be taken literally, as much as it is meant to represent a disproportionate risk compared to those people take as part of living a normal life.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    He made a disciple of Matthew who extorted taxes on behalf of the Roman oppressors, blessed the Centurions servant who did much the same, made a prostitute one of his chief followers etc.

    The point is that we should never reject miscreants in humanity, but rather to seek to turn them away from their former lives and toward salvation.
    Tax collectors are not criminals
    Depends how they operate
    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    He made a disciple of Matthew who extorted taxes on behalf of the Roman oppressors, blessed the Centurions servant who did much the same, made a prostitute one of his chief followers etc.

    The point is that we should never reject miscreants in humanity, but rather to seek to turn them away from their former lives and toward salvation.
    he was very clear that she had to be an ex-prostitute.
    Well Foxy did say 'turn them away from their former lives'.

    Still a better moral than many of us manage toward the lower rungs.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Judgemeadow Community School, Leicester

    https://twitter.com/guidofawkes/status/1397184887308881929?s=21
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    He made a disciple of Matthew who extorted taxes on behalf of the Roman oppressors, blessed the Centurions servant who did much the same, made a prostitute one of his chief followers etc.

    The point is that we should never reject miscreants in humanity, but rather to seek to turn them away from their former lives and toward salvation.
    Tax collectors are not criminals, and he was very clear that she had to be an ex-prostitute.
    Tax collectors were at the time. Israel was under military occupation and the taxes extorted went directly to oppression of the people. And yes, of course Jesus wanted people to turn away from their previous lives. That is pretty much the point of the Gospels.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    In the early days of the pandemic, literally everybody miscalculated the potential problem....other than some crazy bloke on here who kept posting online video of old Chinese people collapsing in the street.

    It was seen as that a terrible thing going on in Wuhan, we need to help and / or get our citizens out of there. Not, oh crap if it gets here it will be just as bad, or even is it already here....There was huge Western exceptionalism, which was the Chinese have worse health, heavily polluted cities and their healthcare just isn't as good.
    Which was reasonable to believe at first.
    Well also, the big key thing we didn't know, the incubation period. SARS1 was bad, but basically you are only infection when you are in a bad way, and you aren't popping down the supermarket when you are in that state, you are in hospital.

    So I presume the Western authorities might well have thought, well if it is like SARS1, we learned the lessons from that, isolate people (which if you remember we were doing) and you can keep on top of it.

    The world didn't shut down for SARS1 or MERS. But obviously South Korea had been hit really hard by those, so they deployed the emergency procedures straight away.
    Indeed, the asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 is a real bitch compared to SARS1.

    SARS2 The Virus Strikes Back.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 73,473
    kle4 said:

    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262

    The Lib whos? Never heard of them.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    I wonder if the inclusion of North Tyneside is really just a nudge to Geordies to all not go to Whitley Bay this Bank Holiday?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    kle4 said:

    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262

    Shows how volatile politics is in recent years. Hubristic Tories take note: the people are fickle.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    In the early days of the pandemic, literally everybody miscalculated the potential problem....other than some crazy bloke on here who kept posting online video of old Chinese people collapsing in the street.

    It was seen as that a terrible thing going on in Wuhan, we need to help and / or get our citizens out of there. Not, oh crap if it gets here it will be just as bad, or even is it already here....There was huge Western exceptionalism, which was the Chinese have worse health, heavily polluted cities and their healthcare just isn't as good.
    Which was reasonable to believe at first.
    “ While being at odds with Mr Johnson's public comments, the statement is borne out by statistics which show the overwhelming majority of people who have died from Covid are over 80.”

    I don’t know anyone who didn’t say that. The problem Cummings and the people who want this to be Boris’s downfall have, is that the public did think bad of Boris at the time he made these remarks anyway, and have now forgiven him. He is relying on these bombshells regurgitating an anger that has already been salved
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 43,011

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    He only started the preaching malarkey at the age of 30. He might have been a right one before that.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1xrNaTO1bI
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262

    Shows how volatile politics is in recent years. Hubristic Tories take note: the people are fickle.
    Are those that constantly predict the demise of the Tories similarly hubristic?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,859

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    We have no idea of what the context was, I can imagine Boris saying something like that as a "joke". Remember the first academic paper (which the author regrets stating like this) said most people will only suffer mild cases and the high risk is to the over 80s...which everybody took to mean under 80, you probably get a bit of a cold, but the author actually meant everything up to needing hospital treatment.

    And early on there was lots of Western exceptionism....well the Chinese in Wuhan have very polluted high density environment, all smoke like chimneys, their lungs are knackered by the time they get a bit older and also despite this 1 in 10 in hospital, the gross number is very small...so they probably just not picking up the vast majority of cases.
    Yes 'mild case' covers a multitude of severities...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    isam said:
    I know Judgemeadow. Best state school in Leicester in results terms.

    Nice to see kids taking an interest in politics.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,506

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    In the early days of the pandemic, literally everybody miscalculated the potential problem....other than some crazy bloke on here who kept posting online video of old Chinese people collapsing in the street.

    It was seen as that a terrible thing going on in Wuhan, we need to help and / or get our citizens out of there. Not, oh crap if it gets here it will be just as bad, or even is it already here....There was huge Western exceptionalism, which was the Chinese have worse health, heavily polluted cities and their healthcare just isn't as good.
    Which was reasonable to believe at first.
    Especially given prior memory of things like SARS which had at the time seemed to scare a lot of people silly, but then in the event never made it here. That’s not of course to prejudge what we may find out ministers were being briefed in private, which is rather more of the big unknown. I would be highly surprised, however, if there was any serious advice being given along the lines of some of the more extreme measures that people are now with the benefit of hindsight saying would have headed the whole thing off.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,675
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    ‘Twas all made up and written down hundreds of years later, in any case.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,486
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    How do you know? It’s supposed to be 2,000 years ago so I dare say the details of his friendship group are rather sketchy.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    ‘Twas all made up and written down hundreds of years later, in any case.
    Whether literally true or not is beside the point, the message is in the spiritual truth.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Foxy said:

    isam said:
    I know Judgemeadow. Best state school in Leicester in results terms.

    Nice to see kids taking an interest in politics.
    Yes, and defying the modern English trend against religious belief. How quaint
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,481

    NEW THREAD

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,486
    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    Pedanticbetting.com

    She’s his fiancée (it’s one of the few gendered nouns in the English language)
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,486
    Foxy said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Some ludicrous eulogies for George Floyd

    The death was a tragedy. The act was a crime. The murderer has been rightfully convicted and jailed

    But the victim was not a hero, nor a saint

    Hero is a word which is already pretty broadly applied, I don't think most mind it even being applied to, say, sporting heroes, so in general as a word it has lost its impact a bit in any case.

    Martyr, if used, is a more interesting one. I'm sure I recall a piece on Unherd, not entirely surprisingly, on that point, I think arguing it can undermine status as a victim, make the icon eclipse the person, but it was a bit rambly if memory serves.
    I'd be deeply uncomfortable calling Floyd a martyr as well, generally martyrs seek out their demise, as a form of apotheosis. Floyd was not suicidal, from what I can tell he was a troubled man, with a troubled background, trying to sort things out, but maybe failing, who knows.

    I dislike the religious trappings surrounding this case. Not just the hagiographies, but the attempt to portray one side or other as intrinsically Good or Evil. It's quite American and it's not productive
    Whether Floyd was good or bad is irrelevant. A copper murdered him in full view of a crowd, because he thought he could get away with it. That is a pretty horrifying situation.
    Jeez. Miss the point, why don't you

    I already said the crime was horrible, and the killer has justly gone down. I saw the video. It is awful

    My dispute is with the quasi-religiose depiction of Floyd the Man. He was a convicted drug dealer, who also did years in jail for a nasty armed break in. He was on drugs when he died (though the cause of his death was the killer cop, not the drugs). He also tried to fix his life. He was, therefore, flawed like 99% of us

    Raising him up as some kind of pure Christian martyr - and people are going to the site of his murder as they go the sites of miraculous visitations - makes me uneasy. And today's hagiographies continue that theme

    "The Street Corner Where George Floyd Was Killed Has Become a Christian Revivalist Site

    "And it’s attracting a bunch of enterprising evangelists who have traveled there from outside the state"


    https://slate.com/human-interest/2020/06/george-floyd-street-corner-christian-revivalist-site-evangelicals.html

    Jesus was crucified alongside robbers. He consorted with prostitutes and with tax collectors, the agents of foreign oppression. God's mercy is not just for the pious. Indeed that is why the Sanhedren and Pharisees objected so strongly to Him.
    I must have missed the bit where Jesus, with five burly disciples, committed aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and broke into a young woman's home, and placed the muzzle of a revolver on her stomach

    Is that in St Luke?
    Jesus may not have personally done that, but he was happy to consort with those who did, or the Biblical equivalent.
    Who?
    He made a disciple of Matthew who extorted taxes on behalf of the Roman oppressors, blessed the Centurions servant who did much the same, made a prostitute one of his chief followers etc.

    The point is that we should never reject miscreants in humanity, but rather to seek to turn them away from their former lives and toward salvation.
    Being a prostitute is not illegal - many call girls might not consider themselves ‘miscreants’.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,822

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    Pedanticbetting.com

    She’s his fiancée (it’s one of the few gendered nouns in the English language)
    Was she at the time?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,486
    Foxy said:

    alex_ said:

    kle4 said:

    PM 'wanted to be infected with Covid on live TV, called virus Kung-Flu and was slow to act because he was on holiday with Carrie': Just some of the grenades Dominic Cummings will lob at Boris Johnson tomorrow in explosive evidence to MPs

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618511/PM-wanted-infected-Covid-live-TV-called-virus-Kung-Flu.html

    I'm calling bullcrap on the first one, it doesn't sound remotely plausible. That's the problem with Cummings loving to be dramatic, I bet a lot of bombshell claims will escape notice or be allowed an easy escape because he has to go one step too far to make things exciting.
    “Slow to act because he was on holiday “with Carrie” makes it sound like some illicit fling, rather than a holiday with his pregnant (?) girlfriend (fiancé?). And that the problem was not being on holiday (are PM’s not allowed holidays now?), but Carrie - which probably speaks to Cummings’ wider agenda.

    Of course, as I mentioned the other day, at the time that Covid was first emerging Johnson was getting a lot of Opposition and press criticism for going AWOL and not devoting enough attention to... flooding.
    Pedanticbetting.com

    She’s his fiancée (it’s one of the few gendered nouns in the English language)
    Was she at the time?
    No idea, I was just correcting the grammar!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,859
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262

    Shows how volatile politics is in recent years. Hubristic Tories take note: the people are fickle.
    The Tories have entirely cannibalised the Brexit and UKIP vote since this poll. The most important election of recent years was Peterborough, if Brexit had won that then history may well have been very different.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 23,287
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262

    Shows how volatile politics is in recent years. Hubristic Tories take note: the people are fickle.
    The Tories have entirely cannibalised the Brexit and UKIP vote since this poll. The most important election of recent years was Peterborough, if Brexit had won that then history may well have been very different.
    In retrospect it was the perfect result for the Conservatives.

    If they had done better it might have kept May in place and brought down Corbyn.

    If BXP had done better then they might have reached a critical mass.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 43,011
    kle4 said:

    A thought to leave people with

    2 years is a long time in politics:

    From @YouGov
    , this week in 2019:

    Lib Dems lead the polls as they start to become “the party of the 48%”

    Lib Dem: 24%
    Brexit: 22%
    Con: 19%
    Lab: 19%
    Grn: 8%
    UKIP: 1%
    Change UK: 1%

    https://twitter.com/james_bowley/status/1397131423115616262

    I think that poll was for the Euro election. Remember them? :lol:
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,657
    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    rcs1000 said:


    Everything you do leaves digital footprints. And all the legislating in the world can't erase them - GPDR, the Data Protection Act, etc. are all bandaids on the fact that in a digital world someone is always going to know where you are.

    Instead of being frightened by that, embrace it.

    That's a seductive line of reasoning but it relies on the relative benevolence or ambivalence of organisations collecting your personal data.

    The ability to collect personal information doesn't equate to the requirement to do so - organisations can because they can. Simply nodding that aside as a function of technology is weak. There should be much more robust prescription against both the State and private organisations telling them what information they can capture, when they can capture it, how such information can and should be used and for how long it should be retained.

    I don't presume benevolence or ambivalence - that doesn't mean I presume malevolence either - but there's a strong argument too much information is being gathered too easily without adequate safeguards (the odd privacy notice here or there or a note in some legalistic small print doesn't really cut it) or accountability. The use of Apps, the "tracking" of individuals via their phones can be justified but that doesn't make it right.

    The wider issue is whether the individual is entitled to a degree of privacy from the State or from private enterprise (in 1984, it was a telescreen, in 2021, it's a mobile phone but is there in truth much difference?). In what way does the State or capitalism have a right to know where I am, what I'm doing, where I'm going or what I have for lunch?
    I make no presumptions regarding benevolence or otherwise.

    My point is a much simpler one. What is known, cannot ever be truly unknown. Once the knowledge genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in.

    You can force, through regulations, firms to not use data in certain ways, or to use it only in others.

    But the reality is that none of these regulations moves the needle more than a smidgen. Because once knowledge exists, then organisations (commercial or governmental) will find ways to use it.

    Final point: every one of us could be massively more privacy conscious than we are. We could all use TOR to access politicalbetting. And we could use individual email addresses and usernames based around random sets of characters hosted with someone like Protonmail for each service we use. We could disable location services on our phones. We could keep our cash as... errr.. cash.

    There a million ways people could increase their privacy. Yet people *choose* to use Gmail, even though they know Google is reading their emails so they can target advertising better to them. Simply: it's easier.

    So, I reject the 'oh we must regulate' crowd. Firstly, because those regulations are incredibly burdensome for business without actually improving privacy. And secondly, because consumer can choose privacy over convenience today. They have that option, and if they choose not to, why should the government force them?
    You cannot use Tor to access political betting. I know have tried. I do use tor all I can. I do use throwaway email address for every fora though. I dont carry a phone, I dont own a car, I use cash as much as possible.I dont use facebook/twitter/whatsapp etc. Personal emails I encrypt. I suspect my digital footprint is lower than most. I don't advocate everyone does this I merely say I protect my privacy as much as I can and others can choose how much they protect theirs.
    But you are the ONLY person in the universe who inherited a dead language as a spoken mother tongue! You are an anthropological Holy Grail, rival death squads of psycholinguistic hit-men will be on your case, to rub you out, or spirit you to safety, depending on whether you threaten their worldview. You're like the Holy Blood in the Da Vinci Code

    I imagine they are prowling your street right this minute, detecting the air for a hint of fresh-baked pasty
    Well total Leon rant completely unconnected to the post. Congratulations you win the seanT award for "what you talking about willis"
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,790
    Nigelb said:



    Not sure that would appeal to @Dura_Ace .

    It's irrelevant as I am almost uninsurable. The only way I can get coverage is to do Third Party Only in my wife's name and add myself as a named driver.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,604
    Foxy said:

    TimS said:

    Vaccines aren't the only thing on our side this time. We have the season too. It's been utterly miserable, as Leon in particular has been letting you know, and I'm sure that has kept people indoors much more than usual in late May, breathing all over each other. But the weather is turning moderately warmer and drier from later this week.

    We know the virus is seasonal in the UK. That is, I'm 99% sure, because of the effect on behaviour of summer weather on people here. We spend much more time, especially social time, outdoors. Unlike in very hot countries with air conditioning. There will be meet ups over the bank holiday weekend but they will be barbecues. Massive amounts of barbecues as it will be the first suitable weekend of the season. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a resumption of falling case numbers from early next week onwards. Keep a look out on the Zoe app.

    Last i looked the models don't factor in seasonality. A fact which apparently was only made widespread when a 2nd year undergraduate maths student looked into them.
    I am not much convinced by seasonality. Our first wave was in the rather nice spring weather, as was Spain, Italy etc. We had an autumn spike then the Christmas one.

    But looking at other countries, there doesn't seem to be a strong seasonality, when taking in local climates.
    I don't believe in seasonality per se but in this country, where good weather means people spend more time outside, it's common sense that there is less scope for transmission. Where it get so hot that the only recourse is air conditioning different considerations apply.

    Also I think you misremember the weather a little - I don't thing the really nice Spring weather began until late March/April time last year.

This discussion has been closed.