There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
I wonder how many members and how many millions in donations they lost, before the big man’s job became untenable?
What I don't understand is that Parker is described as 'bourgeois' as well as 'woke'. I think I'm reasonably woke, in that I think we ought to be aware of the warts as well the high points in our history, but, TBH, I though being 'bourgeois was what the Trust was all about!
I think what they were reaching for was "MasterCard Marxist".
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
And what's missing ?
Any reference to border control.
That is what the government's critical mistake was.
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
What's odd about that is the level of precision in their thinking. Clearly the government has a lot of power, but it's pretty blunt. I kind of understood the tiers in September, but ultimately it's just tinkering around the edges.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
Posthumous outing is de rigeur. In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
WhatsApp messages show that — while he was in charge of No. 10 in March 2020 — Dominic Cummings privately ordered senior Cabinet ministers to deny that herd immunity was ever government policy
So Cummings as all powerful Chief of staff instructs Cabinet Minister to simply deny discussion/policy of “herd immunity” (a phrase he probably did a lot of briefing on to the extent that it became toxic beyond its basic meaning). And then having set the whole thing up, he tries to then use those same denials as a rock upon which to criticise those same ministers. Nice!
To use the vernacular, I think Cummings is going to be hoisted by his own petard and joyous it will be.
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
1. He shouldn't be making this public 2. There is nothing surprising there 3. Even if there was people who still believe the govt would not believe him!
In his first comments on forcing the Ryanair jet to land, Lukashenko says the “bomb threat” came from Switzerland – that noted hotbed of Hamas activity
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
What the fuck is the NT doing having a LGBT campaign in the first place?
You need to look at the sorts of people who did history, sociology, conservation and heritage at university and now choose careers in the third sector, together with their rather uniform backgrounds and politics.
Starmer is obviously wise not to admit to taking illegal substances, given his career history. He has anticipated the potential headlines:
Sheer hypocrisy: DPP and Head of CPS admits criminal offences while jailing thousands for similar offences.
Best avoided by a non-answer. He's not in the same position as politicians with a different hinterland.
To be fair to Starmer, a qualified lawyer who spent time as a prosecutor, his admitting to drug use would be different to most politicians who had different careers.
Gove, for example, was a journalist in the 1990s. For him not to have used cocaine would have been the more shocking revelation!
For me, one of the big questions I want answered is, "did the government leave the first lockdown until the very last minute because they were worried about the long-term changes to the way we live that would come from telling people to work from home?"
In his first comments on forcing the Ryanair jet to land, Lukashenko says the “bomb threat” came from Switzerland – that noted hotbed of Hamas activity
To be fair - that *is* where they keep the money, just like the PLO et al
Hence the old crack about flying Swissair for safety - you'll never get hijacked.
My Financial Advisor opined the other day that that was no longer the case. Much of that sort of cash is now in Bitcoin. At least, that which isn't in London property.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
Could we have clarification on which nation's (singular) heritage is going to be understood and appreciated?
The Nation in which the proprty is situated.
England, Wales and NI? Could we call it the nation of rUK perhaps?
I believe that the National Trust for Scotland is a separate legal entity. So it’s quite clear what it is referring to and you are just being petty and divisive.
It must be sad to have so much hate inside you.
As long as I'm never that pompous this early in the day I'll take the hate
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
A sketch on a whiteboard. That notorious sign of a plan written in stone.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
So the current management could virtue signal about LGBT rights and how achingly right-on they are about it to others.
That's what it's all about. Narcissism.
The beauty of it is that they can call out people that object as bigots, of course.
All fart and no follow through from Dom tomorrow is my prediction.
For someone who was telling people he had a galaxy brain and that he was more powerful than the PM it turns out Dom wasn't that clever or powerful.
He's a pound shop Rasputin.
Grigori Yefimovich took a lot of killing, and the royal family who his assassins were trying to protect were up against the wall (or down the basement to be precise) 17 months later.
Just sayin'..
Irrelevant, the most important thing is will some decent band do a song all about Dom Cummings?
Perhaps that what our entry in next year's Eurovision should be all about.
I thought Talking Heads had already done one?
And you may find yourself living in a shotgun shack And you may find yourself in another part of the world And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife And you may ask yourself, "Well... how did I get here?"
As for today, two things matter:
1 What (if anything) is on paper or tape? Without that, nobody will really believe Dom. Petard, hoist and all that.
2 What (if anything) will make the Parliamentary Conservative Fanclub revise their opinion of their (current) leader? If the answer is "nothing can do that- Boris is our God" we have a problem, albeit one that today won't solve.
The media have broken out into a frenzy over Cummings appearance today, but on listening to 5 live this morning with Rachel Burden and Nicky Campbell Cummings was not coming out of it well, especially from texts and phone ins which universally condemned him
I could be wrong, but it feels a bit like Salmon v Sturgeon when great expectations were that Salmond would deliver a killer blow when in fact he shot himself in the foot, and not only lost his battle, but is now wholly discredited and has a popularity rating worse than even Boris
It remains to be seen over the next few hours, but I think that the chaos over the lockdown advice these last few days is far more likely to effect the conservatives poll ratings than Cummings
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
Posthumous outing is de rigeur. In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
The BBC Rhodes series in 1996 strongly implied he was gay.
I've never done drugs, or fired a gun (excepting an air pistol and an air rifle).
If you learn history then you'll encounter gay people and bi people and all other sorts. Slicing them off into a separate segment as if you can divide the gay Sacred Band from the bi Alexander and the straight(ish) Silver Shields is a bloody odd way to carve up a historical narrative.
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
1. He shouldn't be making this public 2. There is nothing surprising there 3. Even if there was people who still believe the govt would not believe him!
He's a drama king. It's rare to find someone who so obviously thinks so much of themselves (many do, but it's not as obvious), but I fear he doesnt realise more people will be interested in the silly anecdotes he plans to tell for excitement sake, and his attempts to talk about substance will be overlooked.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
What the fuck is the NT doing having a LGBT campaign in the first place?
It was the big thing before the last big thing. I think.
Ladies & Gentlemen, I give you Scotland's "Solicitor of the Year, 2018 Lawyer of the Year 2017 and Former Rector University Glasgow ."
Dear @pritipatel you have no jurisdiction in Scotland, keep your dawn raids to yourself, we intend to demolish your barbaric policies & look forward to welcoming you soon
The breakdown of the rule of law in Scotland whether it is from idiotic and utterly incomprehensible (even to a lawyer) Covid legislation that everyone thinks they have the right to comply with or not, the disregard of our immigration rules and political laws such as the hate crime legislation is deeply troubling. That that breakdown is supported by those in positions of authority is even more so.
The once high regard within which the Scottish legal system was once held has taken a mighty knock, for sure. I guess the SNP will say the only way to restore it will be by independence.
Well, it's a view.
And that's before we consider the fact that the courts have found a High Court prosecution to be malicious for the first time in our legal history and stripped the Crown Office of its immunity as a result. So far just over £20m has been paid out for that but there are others forming a somewhat disorderly queue whose total claims are pushing £100m.
Not to mention our judiciary seem to be as comfortable with locking up journalists as those in Belarus. Difficult times.
For me, one of the big questions I want answered is, "did the government leave the first lockdown until the very last minute because they were worried about the long-term changes to the way we live that would come from telling people to work from home?"
I think they get a pass on late lockdown if indeed it was late.
Because when should they have done it? A week earlier? Perhaps. February? The howls would have been deafening.
I want to hear that they weighed up the benefits of lockdown (keeping people apart and hence subduing the virus) and costs of, well the costs that we are now far clearer were an integral part of lockdown - mental and physical health, economic, etc.
If the govt considered these latter costs which was the reason for the delay then I would find it hard to criticise.
Of course ideally for me it would have been a voluntary lockdown, or targeted, or....but of course saying that a government should trust the people is just crazy talk.
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
And what's missing ?
Any reference to border control.
That is what the government's critical mistake was.
Both then and continuing to now.
What exactly do you mean by "shut the borders" though? We are a major travel hub - do you mean that UK citizens abroad shouldn't have been allowed to return home, people with close family abroad not allowed to visit either way even in end of life scenarios, business travel reasons cancelled, journalists and news organisations not allowed to travel, HGV drivers not able to ply their trade?
This is not easy, practically, economically and on principle.
The government massively cut international travel. And when you look at the traffic light rules now they are pretty draconian aren't they? Even visiting a green list country means a PCR test before leaving the UK plus a test within 72 hours of return to the UK plus a further PCR test two days after return - plus compulsory mask-wearing on route. Amber means all that plus a 4th PCR test 8 days after return plus quarantine. Red means all that plus quarantine in a government prescribed hotel (at traveller's expense).
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
1. He shouldn't be making this public 2. There is nothing surprising there 3. Even if there was people who still believe the govt would not believe him!
He's a drama king. It's rare to find someone who so obviously thinks so much of themselves (many do, but it's not as obvious), but I fear he doesnt realise more people will be interested in the silly anecdotes he plans to tell for excitement sake, and his attempts to talk about substance will be overlooked.
The people who like the silly anecdotes are clearly going to be Boris fans in the first place. His target audience to convince are those who disapprove of silliness and personality cults at the heart of govt. He is not the right person to deliver that message.
Its such a silly approach, just say yes....Nobody is going to give a monkeys if you had a cheeky smoke 40 years ago.
There used to be a R5 show, was it Pienaar which asked a regular series of questions to the MP of week who was the guest and it was always have you done drugs. I remember some Tory, just said yes, of course, and next week Stephen Kinnock came on and did a Starmer.
That all been said, I can't believe Starmer was a party animal....I mean the man is so boring. Chess club captain perhaps, but the big man on campus?
“ Sir Keir said: “I haven’t said no.”
He must have tried drugs, else he’d just say he hadn’t. But it is a tricky one for him as admitting it opens all kinds of cans of worms. I can see why he’d prevaricate
Hardly leaving ‘nothing in the locker’ as Morgan claims though, if he won’t tell all. He won’t speak about how many conquests he’s had either, according to that report.
Sounds very boring....we have an explosive interview, where the interviewee says "not telling"...
Howard Stern didn't get the big ratings back in the day for his radio show from having guests say "not saying".
It does seem like it’s unlikely to have us gasping with shock, or show he has a surprisingly witty repartee, from what’s been leaked. His problem is that the public think he’s a bit bland & it doesn’t sound like much of a game changer in that regard
Johnson on the other hand is at the top of his comedy game. "Kung Flu". (according to Cummings).Tasteless, but funny nonetheless.
Was Hong Kong Phooey a reference to the 1968 pandemic? Number 1 super guy. It's always the mild-mannered janitor, isn't it?
In response to Islam's revelation, I was just commenting on Starmer's hapless seriousness, compared to our jovial hero's biting wit in the midst of a deadly pandemic.
If one can't laugh, they would cry. What do we need in a Prime Minister? 1968 style vaguely racial comedy gold!
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
1. He shouldn't be making this public 2. There is nothing surprising there 3. Even if there was people who still believe the govt would not believe him!
He's a drama king. It's rare to find someone who so obviously thinks so much of themselves (many do, but it's not as obvious), but I fear he doesnt realise more people will be interested in the silly anecdotes he plans to tell for excitement sake, and his attempts to talk about substance will be overlooked.
Further, he has the diagnostic intelligence to be able to analyse the failings of existing systems, but lacks the human and emotional intelligence to be able to understand how things could be managed better (and, more importantly, how successfully to bring about such a better state of affairs).
65/ First sketch of Plan B, PM study, Fri 13/3 eve - shown PM Sat 14/4: NB. Plan A 'our plan' breaks NHS,>4k p/day dead min.Plan B: lockdown, suppress, crash programs (tests/treatments/vaccines etc), escape 1st AND 2nd wave (squiggly line instead of 1 or 2 peaks)... details later https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1397452170249842691/photo/1
And what's missing ?
Any reference to border control.
That is what the government's critical mistake was.
Both then and continuing to now.
What exactly do you mean by "shut the borders" though? We are a major travel hub - do you mean that UK citizens abroad shouldn't have been allowed to return home, people with close family abroad not allowed to visit either way even in end of life scenarios, business travel reasons cancelled, journalists and news organisations not allowed to travel, HGV drivers not able to ply their trade?
This is not easy, practically, economically and on principle.
The government massively cut international travel. And when you look at the traffic light rules now they are pretty draconian aren't they? Even visiting a green list country means a PCR test before leaving the UK plus a test within 72 hours of return to the UK plus a further PCR test two days after return - plus compulsory mask-wearing on route. Amber means all that plus a 4th PCR test 8 days after return plus quarantine. Red means all that plus quarantine in a government prescribed hotel (at traveller's expense).
Unless you work in IT or telecoms where of course being in "quarantine" includes visiting your place of work.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
Posthumous outing is de rigeur. In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
Not harmless. The Daily Mail had a field day writing about this intensely private family who retired from public life after Queen Anne passed.
Can anyone explain the difference between 'minimise travel' and 'avoid non-essential travel?
In terms of foreign travel, most travel insurance won't cover you if the Foreign Office has advised against "all but essential travel" to a destination.
I've never done drugs, or fired a gun (excepting an air pistol and an air rifle).
If you learn history then you'll encounter gay people and bi people and all other sorts. Slicing them off into a separate segment as if you can divide the gay Sacred Band from the bi Alexander and the straight(ish) Silver Shields is a bloody odd way to carve up a historical narrative.
I remember Hadrian being described as “a member of the LGBT community” at the British Museum, something that would have bemused any elite Roman male. The essential distinction in Rome was not gay/straight but active/passive.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
What the fuck is the NT doing having a LGBT campaign in the first place?
You need to look at the sorts of people who did history, sociology, conservation and heritage at university and now choose careers in the third sector, together with their rather uniform backgrounds and politics.
It all starts from there.
Yes you're right. When I studied for my degree ten or so years ago (PPE) the philosophy and the economics parts were rigorous and challenging but - wow - some of the politics stuff when deep into the social sciences were eyebrow-raising to say the least. Sometimes a departure from logic and critical-thinking. Post-modernism has a lot answer for.
For me, one of the big questions I want answered is, "did the government leave the first lockdown until the very last minute because they were worried about the long-term changes to the way we live that would come from telling people to work from home?"
I think they get a pass on late lockdown if indeed it was late.
Because when should they have done it? A week earlier? Perhaps. February? The howls would have been deafening.
I want to hear that they weighed up the benefits of lockdown (keeping people apart and hence subduing the virus) and costs of, well the costs that we are now far clearer were an integral part of lockdown - mental and physical health, economic, etc.
If the govt considered these latter costs which was the reason for the delay then I would find it hard to criticise.
Of course ideally for me it would have been a voluntary lockdown, or targeted, or....but of course saying that a government should trust the people is just crazy talk.
I know we've come a long way in the last 15 months or so, but given the way the government is behaving now, I doubt they were weighing up the possible negative consequences in terms of mental and physical health. The economic consequences, however, may very well have been in their minds. The next few years will be very tough in my opinion.
In terms of voluntary measures, asking people to work from home if possible, would have been an easy win. As it was, I was in the office on Monday 16 March 2020. I'm still angry at my (public sector) employer for insisting on people to coming into the office unless we had some exceptional need or concern. I wish I'd just taken matters into my own hands two weeks earlier.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
Its very interesting to look at history as it actually was. We don't need any woke shite bemoaning it or rewriting it by removing evidence of it. We know about slavery and how awful it was . We were taught history at school.
If you want to look at history "as it actually was", then you must be very much against the policy of trying to get people to be proud of British history, which seems to be current government policy.
I predict that this is sufficiently true that DCs efforts today will not land sufficiently on target to make a difference.
DC's accounts of things is already subject to widespread public doubt, and is the source of a whole series of jokes. This is not a good starting point.
How people react to critics of Boris (who remains popular) will depend on who they are to a high degree.
At one end of the scale if Boris were reliably attacked in terms of policy, truth, humanity, criminality etc by Princess Kate, HM, Mary Berry and David Attenborough he would have a problem.
At the other end of the scale (for his supporters) would be attacks from Hamas, Belarus, Jezza, The Socialist Worker and Putin.
If Kate scored 100 and Hamas O, DC would score about 4.
Witnesses whose general credibility is doubtful or doubted are best keeping out of occasions like this.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
So the current management could virtue signal about LGBT rights and how achingly right-on they are about it to others.
That's what it's all about. Narcissism.
The beauty of it is that they can call out people that object as bigots, of course.
That’s “why” they did it, not an answer to my question…
Mr. F, weirdly, but splendidly, I happened to catch a short BBC radio programme, about Hadrian and Antinous. Aye, the view taken by the Romans was similar to that taken (I believe) by Ronnie Kray.
Imposing modern perspectives on history in that manner is mangling it.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
Posthumous outing is de rigeur. In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
The BBC Rhodes series in 1996 strongly implied he was gay.
Which, if true, is interesting! But not as interesting, I’d say, as his career.
I must admit I’m not sure why Rhodes gets so much stick. He just happened to be very successful in business and empire building, and had some gamey but utterly predictable views for his time.
I don’t really see much difference between Rhodes and Zuckerberg to be honest, except Rhodes has more achievements to his name.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
Posthumous outing is de rigeur. In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
The BBC Rhodes series in 1996 strongly implied he was gay.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
Could we have clarification on which nation's (singular) heritage is going to be understood and appreciated?
The Nation in which the proprty is situated.
England, Wales and NI? Could we call it the nation of rUK perhaps?
I believe that the National Trust for Scotland is a separate legal entity. So it’s quite clear what it is referring to and you are just being petty and divisive.
It must be sad to have so much hate inside you.
As long as I'm never that pompous this early in the day I'll take the hate
Being rude won’t stop me pitying you.
Is there anything that would? A pompous sanctimony antidote would also be helpful.
For me, one of the big questions I want answered is, "did the government leave the first lockdown until the very last minute because they were worried about the long-term changes to the way we live that would come from telling people to work from home?"
I think they get a pass on late lockdown if indeed it was late.
Because when should they have done it? A week earlier? Perhaps. February? The howls would have been deafening.
I want to hear that they weighed up the benefits of lockdown (keeping people apart and hence subduing the virus) and costs of, well the costs that we are now far clearer were an integral part of lockdown - mental and physical health, economic, etc.
If the govt considered these latter costs which was the reason for the delay then I would find it hard to criticise.
Of course ideally for me it would have been a voluntary lockdown, or targeted, or....but of course saying that a government should trust the people is just crazy talk.
I know we've come a long way in the last 15 months or so, but given the way the government is behaving now, I doubt they were weighing up the possible negative consequences in terms of mental and physical health. The economic consequences, however, may very well have been in their minds. The next few years will be very tough in my opinion.
In terms of voluntary measures, asking people to work from home if possible, would have been an easy win. As it was, I was in the office on Monday 16 March 2021. I'm still angry at my (public sector) employer for insisting on people to coming into the office unless we had some exceptional need or concern. I wish I'd just taken matters into my own hands two weeks earlier.
I suppose the unarticulated thought might have been "this is crazy" (as indeed it was, rightly or wrongly) and the feeling that if you legislated to the extent they subsequently did, that would have all kinds of consequences but yes I suppose it was the economics of it that most worried them.
Bizarre behaviour by your employer. Has there been any explanation?
M&S results out today, they are pinning their hopes on the food business.
My experience until the last year their food was 50% better and 20% more expensive than the mainstream competitors, not a bad platform to build on. Not sure if its a result of the Ocado tie up, Brexit, lockdown, strategy or a combination but from recent experiences I would now rate their food as 10% better and 33% more expensive, which does not quite work for me. They will continue to sink.
Top trivia: Aaron Bell MP, one of the committee members who will grill Cummings, has been on countless game shows inc Deal or No Deal, Only Connect, Krypton Factor, Fifteen to One, University Challenge, Eggheads (HT Playbook) https://twitter.com/elashton/status/1397464112200814594
The government was "forced into retreat" over "local lockdowns" when it updated advice for eight areas in England worst-hit by the Indian coronavirus variant, the Daily Telegraph says. It adds that a "Whitehall blame game erupted" after ministers "failed to pass on the new advice" - which asked people not to meet indoors or travel unnecessarily - to local leaders. One insider tells the paper it was the Department of Health and Social Care's responsibility
Once again, I find it hard to take Dom seriously. He was holding the marionette strings, he was legitimately the power behind the throne and for him to now say that he was simply ignored is just complete bullshit revisionist history and blame shifting for the almighty pile of shit coming in the direction of anyone near the levers of power for the period of February 2020 to January 2021.
We also know he has form in this area from when he edited his old blog post a few years ago to include loads of emerging science in quantum computing or something like that to make it seem like he was ahead of the curve.
Anyone else might have an ounce of credibility, Dom has none. He threw it away the moment he started talking about driving to test his eyesight. Nothing he says can be taken seriously now, even if he has a paper trail showing that the government made poor decisons (and they absolutely have done so on many occasions) I don't buy that he wasn't in that decision making process. His attempts to absolve himself of the horror show that was February to January should be laughed out of the room by everyone. He's one of the main culprits.
For me, one of the big questions I want answered is, "did the government leave the first lockdown until the very last minute because they were worried about the long-term changes to the way we live that would come from telling people to work from home?"
I think they get a pass on late lockdown if indeed it was late.
Because when should they have done it? A week earlier? Perhaps. February? The howls would have been deafening.
I want to hear that they weighed up the benefits of lockdown (keeping people apart and hence subduing the virus) and costs of, well the costs that we are now far clearer were an integral part of lockdown - mental and physical health, economic, etc.
If the govt considered these latter costs which was the reason for the delay then I would find it hard to criticise.
Of course ideally for me it would have been a voluntary lockdown, or targeted, or....but of course saying that a government should trust the people is just crazy talk.
The howls wouldn't have been deafening AT ALL. The public was solidly behind tougher, earlier lockdown right from the start of the pandemic. The Government dragged its feet, wavered and waffled, there were thousands of deaths, the NHS was nearly overwhelmed, and they finally gave in.
They then got the vaccination programme right, really precisely right, and that in turn saved thousands of lives. It's a balance, but the one doesn't mean the other isn't true.
Top trivia: Aaron Bell MP, one of the committee members who will grill Cummings, has been on countless game shows inc Deal or No Deal, Only Connect, Krypton Factor, Fifteen to One, University Challenge, Eggheads (HT Playbook) https://twitter.com/elashton/status/1397464112200814594
Used to work for a bookmaker apparently, obviously someone with a keen interest in political betting
The government was "forced into retreat" over "local lockdowns" when it updated advice for eight areas in England worst-hit by the Indian coronavirus variant, the Daily Telegraph says. It adds that a "Whitehall blame game erupted" after ministers "failed to pass on the new advice" - which asked people not to meet indoors or travel unnecessarily - to local leaders. One insider tells the paper it was the Department of Health and Social Care's responsibility
There is no doubt it was mishandled and to be honest is more relevant than anything Cummings alleges today
All fart and no follow through from Dom tomorrow is my prediction.
For someone who was telling people he had a galaxy brain and that he was more powerful than the PM it turns out Dom wasn't that clever or powerful.
He's a pound shop Rasputin.
Grigori Yefimovich took a lot of killing, and the royal family who his assassins were trying to protect were up against the wall (or down the basement to be precise) 17 months later.
Just sayin'..
Irrelevant, the most important thing is will some decent band do a song all about Dom Cummings?
Perhaps that what our entry in next year's Eurovision should be all about.
I thought Talking Heads had already done one?
And you may find yourself living in a shotgun shack And you may find yourself in another part of the world And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife And you may ask yourself, "Well... how did I get here?"
As for today, two things matter:
1 What (if anything) is on paper or tape? Without that, nobody will really believe Dom. Petard, hoist and all that.
2 What (if anything) will make the Parliamentary Conservative Fanclub revise their opinion of their (current) leader? If the answer is "nothing can do that- Boris is our God" we have a problem, albeit one that today won't solve.
I have no interest in the views or opinions of Cummings - only in whatever documents he wants to whistleblow. Tories will then act outraged and claim that as the documents should not have been leaked that they should be ignored like thru don't exist.
Leicester has a small Jewish community, mostly in Stoneygate on the border with Evington.
I know Judgemeadow school, indeed used to do a yoga class there, it is a good school and a number of my colleagues have had children there. I would have been happy for Fox Jr to go there, though he went to the next door Beauchamp College, which also had a small student protest.
I think both schools behaved quite appropriately in response, permitting peaceful protest in break time, and enabling discussion of other perspectives.
I'm sure the Easter celebrations look very similar.
Not sure what your point is. A protest in favour of a Free Palestine is not the same as a religious festival.
Fox Jr did RE, and they covered all religious festivals fairly, including Easter, Passover and Purim, and visited Leicesters Synagogue and Churches. He got an A* at GCSE in it.
All the angry, loud religious chanting sets my alarm bells ringing.
"Nasty, brutish and short" - definition...
1. The pathway to Islamist radicalisation 2.1 The lives of people like me who are unfortunate enough to find ourselves in places where people like that run the show 2.2 The drop from the top of the tall building to the pavement below
Off topic, but in response to your post
Is this the definitive Thomas Hobbes analysis of Islam? 2.2 is somewhat obtuse.
I think he’s referring to Islamic radicals’ policy on LGBT matters
What the good Hobbes is saying is that because life is otherwise nasty, brutish and short, the rise of the strong man leader who can gain your loyalty by offering protection from enemies is a (modified) good thing, because all the alternatives are worse. Hobbes would have broadly said that the appalling Assad regime in Syria is preferred to not having a strong man in charge. The same would be true of an Islamist strong man.
Our sort of liberal democracy is a highly sophisticated strong man system. Bad, but better than all of the rest.
Leicester has a small Jewish community, mostly in Stoneygate on the border with Evington.
I know Judgemeadow school, indeed used to do a yoga class there, it is a good school and a number of my colleagues have had children there. I would have been happy for Fox Jr to go there, though he went to the next door Beauchamp College, which also had a small student protest.
I think both schools behaved quite appropriately in response, permitting peaceful protest in break time, and enabling discussion of other perspectives.
I'm sure the Easter celebrations look very similar.
Not sure what your point is. A protest in favour of a Free Palestine is not the same as a religious festival.
Fox Jr did RE, and they covered all religious festivals fairly, including Easter, Passover and Purim, and visited Leicesters Synagogue and Churches. He got an A* at GCSE in it.
All the angry, loud religious chanting sets my alarm bells ringing.
"Nasty, brutish and short" - definition...
1. The pathway to Islamist radicalisation 2.1 The lives of people like me who are unfortunate enough to find ourselves in places where people like that run the show 2.2 The drop from the top of the tall building to the pavement below
Off topic, but in response to your post
Is this the definitive Thomas Hobbes analysis of Islam? 2.2 is somewhat obtuse.
Merely an allusion to the criminal justice policies of the Government of Gaza. Islamist regimes have a variety of inventive methods for slaughtering gays. The Palestinians favour the enforced fall from height, which I seem to recall was also a favourite of Daesh. The Iranian theocracy tends towards stringing us up from cranes on construction sites. More traditional jurisdictions still prefer stoning: fun for all the family!
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
Its very interesting to look at history as it actually was. We don't need any woke shite bemoaning it or rewriting it by removing evidence of it. We know about slavery and how awful it was . We were taught history at school.
If you want to look at history "as it actually was", then you must be very much against the policy of trying to get people to be proud of British history, which seems to be current government policy.
I don’t believe in romanticising the past. But, as part of my study of history, I do like to put myself in the shoes of people who viewed the world quite differently to me, and who inhabited a world much more violent and short of resources than my own, and I find myself sympathising with them much more than condemning them.
Its such a silly approach, just say yes....Nobody is going to give a monkeys if you had a cheeky smoke 40 years ago.
There used to be a R5 show, was it Pienaar which asked a regular series of questions to the MP of week who was the guest and it was always have you done drugs. I remember some Tory, just said yes, of course, and next week Stephen Kinnock came on and did a Starmer.
FFS. Why doesn't he just say he was one for the doobage? Many people his age were. It makes him more relatable, and, arguably, interesting. Who the heck is advising him? Edit. I see you said pretty much the same in the extended remix of your post. I replied to the radio play single. All bloody baffling.
One theory I've heard about politicians not wanting to admit to past drug use is that they have children who are teenagers/students and they don't want to give them a free pass to do drugs because mummy or daddy publicly admitted to doing the wacky baccy or something stronger when they were students.
You've got two choices when asked this sort of question as a politician. Either you can give witty answer, or an honest one. This is Boris' advantage over Starmer.
My answer would be that I've never taken drugs, I was too scared of dying don't need to take drugs to have a good time.
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.
I'm 43 and my 2nd jab isn't scheduled until 21st July. That's just under 12 weeks after my first, which I got pretty much as soon as slots opened up for my age group. So I reckon unless they bring the gap between jabs in for 40+ as they have 50+ (quite possible I guess?) there will be a lot of over-40s like me who got jab 1 in late April/early May and so are due for jab 2 in July.
You can reschedule for 8 weeks after the first if you want now online.
Thanks. I actually didn't know that. Was under the impression I had to wait to be contacted. Will look into it tomorrow. Cheers!
I only knew because I saw @Anabobazina tell someone else!
And I only found out by accident because I had to move my original appointment due to a diary clash!
@Anabobazina Yes, I knew about this but my wife hasn't brought forward her 2nd jab because the system makes you cancel the original appointment before booking a new one afresh - meaning that there is a risk that there are no earlier appoints available and you have lost your original appointment date, so could in theory end up in a worse position than when you started.
So we haven't taken the risk.
Is that even possible though? It seems to me that the normal term is now eight weeks so worst case scenario is that you are no worse off?
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
Could we have clarification on which nation's (singular) heritage is going to be understood and appreciated?
The Nation in which the proprty is situated.
England, Wales and NI? Could we call it the nation of rUK perhaps?
I believe that the National Trust for Scotland is a separate legal entity. So it’s quite clear what it is referring to and you are just being petty and divisive.
It must be sad to have so much hate inside you.
As long as I'm never that pompous this early in the day I'll take the hate
Being rude won’t stop me pitying you.
Is there anything that would? A pompous sanctimony antidote would also be helpful.
It must be tough knowing your dream is slipping away and all you can do to slow it is fake posts on an internet board
Re: discussions about wallpaper. Aren’t people overlooking that this is an appearance before the Health Select committee to talk about the Govt’s Covid response? It’s not “any questions with Dominic Cummings”
I actually discussed this with my friend last night.
Dom Cummings: The PM was distracted at the start of the pandemic with writing a book to pay his divorce bill and obsessing with the refurbishment of the Downing Street flat and who paid for it.
That allows the Health Select Committee to legitimately discuss the wallpaper/refurbishment today.
But I’m not sure why they would even want to? Firstly it just discredits their efforts to conduct a serious investigation. And secondly, isn’t the conventional wisdom now that obsessing for days over wallpaper actually did as much damage to his opponents as it did to Johnson?
There is an almost Soviet demand from the fanbois that disadvantageous people or subject matter should be airbrushed from Johnsonian history.
I am not sure your conventional wisdom stacks up. It is true the wallpaper didn't hang (I thank you!) Johnson, but it is wishful thinking to suggest accusations of wallpaper impropriety damaged Johnson's opponents. Johnson's opponents were damaged by a like-clockwork vaccination programme (c.f. chaos in the EU) fourth tranche free self employed furlough cheques dropping through the letter box in May and a Stockholm syndrome surrounding being released in time for the pubs opening. Carrie's gold wallpaper may only be an issue if post-pandemic mortgage foreclosures start to happen.
The Boris supporters club at PB seem a little uneasy at Cummings's testimony today. Don't worry, it will be fine. Cummings's reputation is that of someone economical with the truth operative. You need only worry if he can back his accusations up with audio or video, and surely he is not disreputable enough to resort to that kind of tactic, is he?
For me, one of the big questions I want answered is, "did the government leave the first lockdown until the very last minute because they were worried about the long-term changes to the way we live that would come from telling people to work from home?"
I think they get a pass on late lockdown if indeed it was late.
Because when should they have done it? A week earlier? Perhaps. February? The howls would have been deafening.
I want to hear that they weighed up the benefits of lockdown (keeping people apart and hence subduing the virus) and costs of, well the costs that we are now far clearer were an integral part of lockdown - mental and physical health, economic, etc.
If the govt considered these latter costs which was the reason for the delay then I would find it hard to criticise.
Of course ideally for me it would have been a voluntary lockdown, or targeted, or....but of course saying that a government should trust the people is just crazy talk.
I know we've come a long way in the last 15 months or so, but given the way the government is behaving now, I doubt they were weighing up the possible negative consequences in terms of mental and physical health. The economic consequences, however, may very well have been in their minds. The next few years will be very tough in my opinion.
In terms of voluntary measures, asking people to work from home if possible, would have been an easy win. As it was, I was in the office on Monday 16 March 2021. I'm still angry at my (public sector) employer for insisting on people to coming into the office unless we had some exceptional need or concern. I wish I'd just taken matters into my own hands two weeks earlier.
I suppose the unarticulated thought might have been "this is crazy" (as indeed it was, rightly or wrongly) and the feeling that if you legislated to the extent they subsequently did, that would have all kinds of consequences but yes I suppose it was the economics of it that most worried them.
Bizarre behaviour by your employer. Has there been any explanation?
The backlash to their attempt to give advisory/voluntary guidance to those in or around the outbreak areas doesn't hold out much promise that it would have worked.
Or the stuff like "If I hold a scotch egg, will that make it okay?" from last year.
The UK public are as likely to think being “woke” is a compliment (26%) as they are to think it’s an insult (24%) – and are in fact most likely to say they don’t know what the term means (38%). New study with @policyatkings
The Boris supporters club at PB seem a little uneasy at Cummings's testimony today. Don't worry, it will be fine. Cummings's reputation is that of someone economical with the truth operative. You need only worry if he can back his accusations up with audio or video, and surely he is not disreputable enough to resort to that kind of tactic, is he?
The real poetry will come when the self-interested narcissist who weaponised falsehood realises he cannot inflict damage on the other self-interested narcissist who weaponised falsehood, because he undermined truth-telling as a functional quality in political discourse. https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1397461501141790722
I've never done drugs, or fired a gun (excepting an air pistol and an air rifle).
If you learn history then you'll encounter gay people and bi people and all other sorts. Slicing them off into a separate segment as if you can divide the gay Sacred Band from the bi Alexander and the straight(ish) Silver Shields is a bloody odd way to carve up a historical narrative.
I remember Hadrian being described as “a member of the LGBT community” at the British Museum, something that would have bemused any elite Roman male. The essential distinction in Rome was not gay/straight but active/passive.
The other essential distinction in Rome was between those with and those without the power to decline sexual attention.
Uncle Bulgaria, I've never understood those seeking pride or shame in history (unless it's their own).
Attaching some sort of moral responsibility to oneself on account of things other people have done is... well, silly.
The modern fashion is to apologise profusely for things one’s ancestors did, while saying “I’m sorry if you’re offended” in respect of one’s own wrongdoing.
walking into a conference room where the large table everyone is silently seated around is entirely covered in photos of a large whiteboard on which i have written 'who do we not save' and i wonder... is this about me? https://twitter.com/journodave/status/1397468642330267652
In his first comments on forcing the Ryanair jet to land, Lukashenko says the “bomb threat” came from Switzerland – that noted hotbed of Hamas activity
I've never done drugs, or fired a gun (excepting an air pistol and an air rifle).
If you learn history then you'll encounter gay people and bi people and all other sorts. Slicing them off into a separate segment as if you can divide the gay Sacred Band from the bi Alexander and the straight(ish) Silver Shields is a bloody odd way to carve up a historical narrative.
I remember Hadrian being described as “a member of the LGBT community” at the British Museum, something that would have bemused any elite Roman male. The essential distinction in Rome was not gay/straight but active/passive.
The other essential distinction in Rome was between those with and those without the power to decline sexual attention.
Very much so. Cicero set a jury roaring with laughter, when he defended a man who was charged with various offences, including the rape of a teenage actress. The very idea that an actress was anything other than a whore who was asking for it was manifestly absurd. Indeed, it was quite bad form to raise the issue at all, a bit of mud-slinging.
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
Its very interesting to look at history as it actually was. We don't need any woke shite bemoaning it or rewriting it by removing evidence of it. We know about slavery and how awful it was . We were taught history at school.
If you want to look at history "as it actually was", then you must be very much against the policy of trying to get people to be proud of British history, which seems to be current government policy.
I don’t believe in romanticising the past. But, as part of my study of history, I do like to put myself in the shoes of people who viewed the world quite differently to me, and who inhabited a world much more violent and short of resources than my own, and I find myself sympathising with them much more than condemning them.
Sure, but my point was more that when the Education Secretary is saying people "should be proud of British history", then it seems at the very least that there is official ideological pressure not to simply look at history "as it actually was", but rather with an agenda of trying to create a pre-determined emotion in people.
Obviously, some people think that creating that kind of nationalist feeling in people is healthy for society (I don't, but I understand the argument I suppose), but when there is pushback against that agenda I find it in general a bit rich for people to claim that it is the "woke shit" merchants who are the ones who don't want to look at history "as it actually was".
In general. I know nothing about what the National Trust is up to.
walking into a conference room where the large table everyone is silently seated around is entirely covered in photos of a large whiteboard on which i have written 'who do we not save' and i wonder... is this about me? https://twitter.com/journodave/status/1397468642330267652
There's a moment in the US House of Cards when Frank Underwood walks across to a homeless man who is railing against the Government, crouches down and whispers to him, 'no-one's listening. No-one cares.'
NT quote in the article: "What the National Trust needs now is a chair with a deep understanding and appreciation of our nation's heritage."
I am over the moon. Someone at last is saying enough of this woke Shittery.l
Yes. The purpose of history in this country should not be to look critically at our past, it should be a hagiography to induce patriotism in the middle classes.
Bollocks. Our History is our history. This is not some Orwellian 1984 world. It happened. Rewriting or hiding or removing evidence of it will not alter the fact that it happened,. Shameful tho it was. It happened.
Glad to hear that you are supportive of the displays on how slave plantations funded many NT properties.
It’s always a question of balance. The source of the wealth is part of the story and shouldn’t be glossed over (and neither should the efforts of many to combat it).
But the NT is thoughtless. In their LGBT campaign, for example, they outed a cousin of a friend of mine who was almost certainly gay but intensely private and chose not to disclose his sexuality in his lifetime. What gave the NT the right to (a) assume and (b) prominently disclose that fact?
Posthumous outing is de rigeur. In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
The BBC Rhodes series in 1996 strongly implied he was gay.
Which, if true, is interesting! But not as interesting, I’d say, as his career.
I must admit I’m not sure why Rhodes gets so much stick. He just happened to be very successful in business and empire building, and had some gamey but utterly predictable views for his time.
I don’t really see much difference between Rhodes and Zuckerberg to be honest, except Rhodes has more achievements to his name.
Comments
Any reference to border control.
That is what the government's critical mistake was.
Both then and continuing to now.
And they never shut the borders!
In fact last night on Wiki I read that Cecil Rhodes (never married!) was possibly gay.
Harmless stuff, although what “gay” means today and what “gay” might have meant then must surely have changed substantially.
2. There is nothing surprising there
3. Even if there was people who still believe the govt would not believe him!
Hence the old crack about flying Swissair for safety - you'll never get hijacked.
It all starts from there.
Gove, for example, was a journalist in the 1990s. For him not to have used cocaine would have been the more shocking revelation!
That's what it's all about. Narcissism.
The beauty of it is that they can call out people that object as bigots, of course.
And you may find yourself living in a shotgun shack
And you may find yourself in another part of the world
And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile
And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife
And you may ask yourself, "Well... how did I get here?"
As for today, two things matter:
1 What (if anything) is on paper or tape? Without that, nobody will really believe Dom. Petard, hoist and all that.
2 What (if anything) will make the Parliamentary Conservative Fanclub revise their opinion of their (current) leader? If the answer is "nothing can do that- Boris is our God" we have a problem, albeit one that today won't solve.
The media have broken out into a frenzy over Cummings appearance today, but on listening to 5 live this morning with Rachel Burden and Nicky Campbell Cummings was not coming out of it well, especially from texts and phone ins which universally condemned him
I could be wrong, but it feels a bit like Salmon v Sturgeon when great expectations were that Salmond would deliver a killer blow when in fact he shot himself in the foot, and not only lost his battle, but is now wholly discredited and has a popularity rating worse than even Boris
It remains to be seen over the next few hours, but I think that the chaos over the lockdown advice these last few days is far more likely to effect the conservatives poll ratings than Cummings
I've never done drugs, or fired a gun (excepting an air pistol and an air rifle).
If you learn history then you'll encounter gay people and bi people and all other sorts. Slicing them off into a separate segment as if you can divide the gay Sacred Band from the bi Alexander and the straight(ish) Silver Shields is a bloody odd way to carve up a historical narrative.
Not to mention our judiciary seem to be as comfortable with locking up journalists as those in Belarus. Difficult times.
Because when should they have done it? A week earlier? Perhaps. February? The howls would have been deafening.
I want to hear that they weighed up the benefits of lockdown (keeping people apart and hence subduing the virus) and costs of, well the costs that we are now far clearer were an integral part of lockdown - mental and physical health, economic, etc.
If the govt considered these latter costs which was the reason for the delay then I would find it hard to criticise.
Of course ideally for me it would have been a voluntary lockdown, or targeted, or....but of course saying that a government should trust the people is just crazy talk.
This is not easy, practically, economically and on principle.
The government massively cut international travel. And when you look at the traffic light rules now they are pretty draconian aren't they? Even visiting a green list country means a PCR test before leaving the UK plus a test within 72 hours of return to the UK plus a further PCR test two days after return - plus compulsory mask-wearing on route. Amber means all that plus a 4th PCR test 8 days after return plus quarantine. Red means all that plus quarantine in a government prescribed hotel (at traveller's expense).
"Minimise travel" is meaningless.
In terms of voluntary measures, asking people to work from home if possible, would have been an easy win. As it was, I was in the office on Monday 16 March 2020. I'm still angry at my (public sector) employer for insisting on people to coming into the office unless we had some exceptional need or concern. I wish I'd just taken matters into my own hands two weeks earlier.
DC's accounts of things is already subject to widespread public doubt, and is the source of a whole series of jokes. This is not a good starting point.
How people react to critics of Boris (who remains popular) will depend on who they are to a high degree.
At one end of the scale if Boris were reliably attacked in terms of policy, truth, humanity, criminality etc by Princess Kate, HM, Mary Berry and David Attenborough he would have a problem.
At the other end of the scale (for his supporters) would be attacks from Hamas, Belarus, Jezza, The Socialist Worker and Putin.
If Kate scored 100 and Hamas O, DC would score about 4.
Witnesses whose general credibility is doubtful or doubted are best keeping out of occasions like this.
Imposing modern perspectives on history in that manner is mangling it.
But not as interesting, I’d say, as his career.
I must admit I’m not sure why Rhodes gets so much stick. He just happened to be very successful in business and empire building, and had some gamey but utterly predictable views for his time.
I don’t really see much difference between Rhodes and Zuckerberg to be honest, except Rhodes has more achievements to his name.
Bizarre behaviour by your employer. Has there been any explanation?
My experience until the last year their food was 50% better and 20% more expensive than the mainstream competitors, not a bad platform to build on. Not sure if its a result of the Ocado tie up, Brexit, lockdown, strategy or a combination but from recent experiences I would now rate their food as 10% better and 33% more expensive, which does not quite work for me. They will continue to sink.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57251682
Attaching some sort of moral responsibility to oneself on account of things other people have done is... well, silly.
https://twitter.com/elashton/status/1397464112200814594
We also know he has form in this area from when he edited his old blog post a few years ago to include loads of emerging science in quantum computing or something like that to make it seem like he was ahead of the curve.
Anyone else might have an ounce of credibility, Dom has none. He threw it away the moment he started talking about driving to test his eyesight. Nothing he says can be taken seriously now, even if he has a paper trail showing that the government made poor decisons (and they absolutely have done so on many occasions) I don't buy that he wasn't in that decision making process. His attempts to absolve himself of the horror show that was February to January should be laughed out of the room by everyone. He's one of the main culprits.
They then got the vaccination programme right, really precisely right, and that in turn saved thousands of lives. It's a balance, but the one doesn't mean the other isn't true.
Our sort of liberal democracy is a highly sophisticated strong man system. Bad, but better than all of the rest.
I am not sure your conventional wisdom stacks up. It is true the wallpaper didn't hang (I thank you!) Johnson, but it is wishful thinking to suggest accusations of wallpaper impropriety damaged Johnson's opponents. Johnson's opponents were damaged by a like-clockwork vaccination programme (c.f. chaos in the EU) fourth tranche free self employed furlough cheques dropping through the letter box in May and a Stockholm syndrome surrounding being released in time for the pubs opening. Carrie's gold wallpaper may only be an issue if post-pandemic mortgage foreclosures start to happen.
The Boris supporters club at PB seem a little uneasy at Cummings's testimony today. Don't worry, it will be fine. Cummings's reputation is that of someone economical with the truth operative. You need only worry if he can back his accusations up with audio or video, and surely he is not disreputable enough to resort to that kind of tactic, is he?
Or the stuff like "If I hold a scotch egg, will that make it okay?" from last year.
https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1397464250986156035?s=20
Be interesting to see the age splits....
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1397461501141790722
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/culture-wars-in-the-uk-how-the-public-understand-the-debate.pdf
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1397468818956500995
walking into a conference room where the large table everyone is silently seated around is entirely covered in photos of a large whiteboard on which i have written 'who do we not save' and i wonder... is this about me?
https://twitter.com/journodave/status/1397468642330267652
Obviously, some people think that creating that kind of nationalist feeling in people is healthy for society (I don't, but I understand the argument I suppose), but when there is pushback against that agenda I find it in general a bit rich for people to claim that it is the "woke shit" merchants who are the ones who don't want to look at history "as it actually was".
In general. I know nothing about what the National Trust is up to.
https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg6/chapter/assessing-cost-effectiveness