Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
I dont know, it was you who did it
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
Isn't that because Islam comes in many flavours? I know plenty of Muslims who have totally progressive views on things like homosexuality and women's rights. Just like Christians, Jews, Hindus and Athiests also hold a range of views. Are the percentages of fundamentalists/moderates the same across all religious groups in the UK? Probably not. But criticising Islam as a whole isn't really helpful.
I thought over 50% of a group thinking something should be enough to not have to pretend we have to caveat, but maybe not. Could be wrong
FWIW @TheSun Readers reckon @MattHancock should get the sack -- interesting perhaps, since this Govt always argues the 'media elite' are out of touch etc. with grassroots/Red Wall etc.
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
When I rearranged my 2nd jab a few days ago, there was absolutely no problem getting a jab any time I wanted it. That was AZ though - the others may be different.
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
I dont know, it was you who did it
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
Isn't that because Islam comes in many flavours? I know plenty of Muslims who have totally progressive views on things like homosexuality and women's rights. Just like Christians, Jews, Hindus and Athiests also hold a range of views. Are the percentages of fundamentalists/moderates the same across all religious groups in the UK? Probably not. But criticising Islam as a whole isn't really helpful.
I thought over 50% of a group thinking something should be enough to not have to pretend we have to caveat, but maybe not. Could be wrong
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
Well, it'll have to be one hell of a differential turnout - especially the Muslim population numbers I posted include children: the proportion of adults will be lower.
I'd say he has less than a 5% chance of winning. I simply can't see how Con + BXP + Heavy Woolen vote share of 51% at the last election ends up dropping below 35%. And that's a pretty extreme worst case scenario. Realistically, the Conservatives will be in the 40s, and that means that Galloway would have to grab an awful lot of the Labour vote.
He can only win if he gets a good chunk of WWC Leave as well.
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
It's about 8 or so weeks since we had the small numbers of 1st doses being given in April and early May so it definitely shrinks the second dose pool under the current guidance. AZ 2nds it seems ideally need the 8 week gap to maximise protection but I wonder if the JCVI/government could be doing more to get Pfizer and Moderna 2nds done a bit sooner since you can have just the 3-4 week gap with those for good 2 dose protection.
We are at
England 83.1 NI 79.3 Scotland 83.7 Wales 89.1
At the current pace, we will be on 90% in England in 17 days or so. Scotland a little later, Wales will be there in 9 days or so - if they keep up their steady trickle... NI is a long way behind.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Except in this case, it doesn't seem to be the case. 11 years ago when this company was contracted by the NHS, Hancock was only just elected an MP and nowhere near the levers of power.
Sky News gets worse by the day.
Yes, but the brother only joined in Oct 2019, a year after Hancock became SoS Health.
The web of contacts between senior ministers and companies with NHS contracts does rather whiff, and Hancock certainly has form.
The foresight by this company is worthy of Back to the Future Biff Tannen Sports Almanac based predictions.
October 2019, UK total stalemate over Brexit, nothing getting done on anything and utter uncertainty about any direction for the future. And nobody thought Boris would win a big majority in any potential GE, rather that it would lead to more stalemate on everything, possibility a second referendum, perhaps back into the EU, yadda yadda yadda.
Let alone a global pandemic requiring massive ramping up of NHS auxiliary services or that the Health Secretary would start an affair in the middle of it.
You assume that the affair started recently, I see.
The company specialises in contracted out GP services, something that Hancock was promoting from his fist days in office. Who better to have as Director of Strategy than the brother of his advisor and "close friend".
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
Take a look at the curves of first dose take up by the relevant age bucket and you will see what I mean. The problem certainly is that there’s just about no one left eligible for Azn who wants a vaccine. But even among the younger cohorts being offered Pfizer or Moderna, the curve are topping out already.
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
When I rearranged my 2nd jab a few days ago, there was absolutely no problem getting a jab any time I wanted it. That was AZ though - the others may be different.
Sid in the warehouse thanks you....He is currently had to resort to sneaking some of the 7+ million unused AZN jabs he has been asked to store inside display models of fridges in Curry PC Worlds up and down the country....
The government have already said that supply is limiting things for Pfizer, and Moderna I believe they are nearly through all the deliveries they will get for now.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Extraordinary. Absolutely extraordinary.
Hancock got into Oxford.
Perhaps he stumbled in by mistake, Oxford is full of narrow alleys?
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
As a general rule, scandals don't affect voting very much. (Yes, I know: 'Tory sleaze' in the 1990s. But that was with master propagandist Alastair Campbell exploiting the opportunity. Starmer's lot: not so much..)
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
Well, it'll have to be one hell of a differential turnout - especially the Muslim population numbers I posted include children: the proportion of adults will be lower.
I'd say he has less than a 5% chance of winning. I simply can't see how Con + BXP + Heavy Woolen vote share of 51% at the last election ends up dropping below 35%. And that's a pretty extreme worst case scenario. Realistically, the Conservatives will be in the 40s, and that means that Galloway would have to grab an awful lot of the Labour vote.
That 51% is the key figure. Assuming that the Conservatives have simply hoovered up the votes of those to the more populist right of them, they are home and dry and would have been in 2019 without the splitters.
Only an innumerate can say Labour are doing well at the moment, but they've been unlucky/foolish in the places where the by-elections have landed.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
Take a look at the curves of first dose take up by the relevant age bucket and you will see what I mean. The problem certainly is that there’s just about no one left eligible for Azn who wants a vaccine. But even among the younger cohorts being offered Pfizer or Moderna, the curve are topping out already.
Which is why this big walk in push that the NHS is going for this weekend is a good idea. For those who aren't the keen beans who wanted to get it out of the way straight away or can't be bothered to fill in the form, it gives them an opportunity to get there and have it done.
Also, I feel that if there was a shortage with several million waiting, we probably wouldn't have the capacity to do walk ins on this scale.
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
That is my take re the differentiated turnout. I would agree he doesn't have the demographics in a normal election but, in a low turnout one, it could make the difference.
Plus the by-election is two days after the England v Germany match. Can't see that helping Labour (England loses, people still in a bad mood and don't bother voting; England win and BJ gets to wave the flag).
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
Well, it'll have to be one hell of a differential turnout - especially the Muslim population numbers I posted include children: the proportion of adults will be lower.
I'd say he has less than a 5% chance of winning. I simply can't see how Con + BXP + Heavy Woolen vote share of 51% at the last election ends up dropping below 35%. And that's a pretty extreme worst case scenario. Realistically, the Conservatives will be in the 40s, and that means that Galloway would have to grab an awful lot of the Labour vote.
Good point about the children.
Can't see the Cons getting into the forties. I don't think they even managed that back in Elizabeth Peacock's day. (?). And right now doesn't feel like the political climate in which people are clamouring to ho out and vote Conservative. I reckon the rag tag and bobtail of the right will get a not inconsiderable number of votes. And yes, realignment, but also the seat has changed demographically since the 80s not necessarily in the blues' favour.
My prediction FWIW (not much) is Con 31, Lab 25, Gigi 22.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Extraordinary. Absolutely extraordinary.
Hancock got into Oxford.
Perhaps he stumbled in by mistake, Oxford is full of narrow alleys?
I have always found it full of lecherous dons, sleeping with adoring students.
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
Take a look at the curves of first dose take up by the relevant age bucket and you will see what I mean. The problem certainly is that there’s just about no one left eligible for Azn who wants a vaccine. But even among the younger cohorts being offered Pfizer or Moderna, the curve are topping out already.
Which is why this big walk in push that NHS is going for this weekend is a good idea. For those who aren't the keen beans who wanted to get it out of the way straight away or can't be bothered to fill in the form, it gives them an opportunity to get there and have it done.
Also, I feel that if there was a shortage with several million waiting, we probably wouldn't have the capacity to do walk ins on this scale.
In the last week, just 15% of newly administered first doses have been given to 30-39s and just 0.8% to 40-49s.
30 somethings are only at 61% first doses on NIMS population data. They can creep it up a bit I’m sure but it’s diminishing returns stuff now.
40 somethings are at 76% 1st doses, they’ll be lucky to eke another couple of percent out of that in this phase of the programme you’d have thought.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
I'm informed my niece will be getting hers on the 30th, she's 18 so will be very near the back end of the jabs queue.
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
Well, it'll have to be one hell of a differential turnout - especially the Muslim population numbers I posted include children: the proportion of adults will be lower.
I'd say he has less than a 5% chance of winning. I simply can't see how Con + BXP + Heavy Woolen vote share of 51% at the last election ends up dropping below 35%. And that's a pretty extreme worst case scenario. Realistically, the Conservatives will be in the 40s, and that means that Galloway would have to grab an awful lot of the Labour vote.
Good point about the children.
Can't see the Cons getting into the forties. I don't think they even managed that back in Elizabeth Peacock's day. (?). And right now doesn't feel like the political climate in which people are clamouring to ho out and vote Conservative. I reckon the rag tag and bobtail of the right will get a not inconsiderable number of votes. And yes, realignment, but also the seat has changed demographically since the 80s not necessarily in the blues' favour.
My prediction FWIW (not much) is Con 31, Lab 25, Gigi 22.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Extraordinary. Absolutely extraordinary.
Hancock got into Oxford.
Perhaps he stumbled in by mistake, Oxford is full of narrow alleys?
I have always found it full of lecherous dons, sleeping with adoring students.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Extraordinary. Absolutely extraordinary.
Hancock got into Oxford.
Perhaps he stumbled in by mistake, Oxford is full of narrow alleys?
Compare & contrast, as Zoology papers used to instruct us in my youth, Toby Young and Matt Hancock.
Eight positive Covid-19 cases were recorded among the 30,000 people who attended the FA Cup semi-final, the FA Cup final and the Carabao Cup final.
Isn't this just reflecting that testing all who attend before they do works? And thus setting a dangerous precedent for all social activity to come?
Or that it shows there is procedure that can be followed and results in very low risk?
I don't disagree but I worry about the implications for spontaneity in life. I would prefer to be able to choose on the day if I want to go watch my beloved Swindon play, not have to take two lateral flow tests in the week before, or worse arrange a PCR.
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
That is my take re the differentiated turnout. I would agree he doesn't have the demographics in a normal election but, in a low turnout one, it could make the difference.
Plus the by-election is two days after the England v Germany match. Can't see that helping Labour (England loses, people still in a bad mood and don't bother voting; England win and BJ gets to wave the flag).
Were I George Galloway, I would be printing 15k leaflets showing that Julia HB picture of the Queen at the funeral and Grabcock hard at work. And carpet bomb them at the Tory wards.
They don’t need to vote for him, they just need to not turn up.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
I’ve just read Leon’s fake cnn tweet out to my wife and she’s walked off before I could tell her it was a joker online making it up
Imagine if CNN DO say something like that in the next hour or two. How would people react?!
Well I can tell you because my wife doesn’t know it was you making it up. She thought it was a tweet from cnn. She said “oh I figured as much. Anyway I have to go and check on the casserole”.
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
She has been up to speed with the story for a long time but prefers not to dwell on it.
I reckon Elizondo is right. If this disclosure ever occurs (an almighty IF, of course), it will be a truly Sombre Thing
Those that don't ignore it will be sobered, or frightened. Panicked?
I have no idea if the US Military (or anyone else) does have this knowledge, but if they did, it would indeed be a tremendous responsibility: how do you release it? How do you prep homo sapiens for such a shocking revelation?
What I've often thought would be terrible is if an Alien - ET, say, or a Dalek - visited just YOU. Came to see just you, introduced itself, had a chat, then said "spread the word" and disappeared.
Where does that leave you? With a straight (extremely unpalatable) choice. Ignore the instruction and keep an unbearable secret that will render your life unmanageable. Or obey and be chalked down - even by those you love - as a total nutcase.
"Oh god, what's happened to Simon is such a tragedy. He might have to go somewhere for a while, is what I'm hearing."
I’ve just read Leon’s fake cnn tweet out to my wife and she’s walked off before I could tell her it was a joker online making it up
Imagine if CNN DO say something like that in the next hour or two. How would people react?!
Well I can tell you because my wife doesn’t know it was you making it up. She thought it was a tweet from cnn. She said “oh I figured as much. Anyway I have to go and check on the casserole”.
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
She has been up to speed with the story for a long time but prefers not to dwell on it.
I reckon Elizondo is right. If this disclosure ever occurs (an almighty IF, of course), it will be a truly Sombre Thing
Those that don't ignore it will be sobered, or frightened. Panicked?
I have no idea if the US Military (or anyone else) does have this knowledge, but if they did, it would indeed be a tremendous responsibility: how do you release it? How do you prep homo sapiens for such a shocking revelation?
What I've often thought would be terrible is if an Alien - ET, say, or a Dalek - visited just YOU. Came to see just you, introduced itself, had a chat, then said "spread the word" and disappeared.
Where does that leave you? With a straight (extremely unpalatable) choice. Ignore the instruction and keep an unbearable secret that will render your life unmanageable. Or obey and be chalked down - even by those you love - as a total nutcase.
"Oh god, what's happened to Simon is such a tragedy. He might have to go somewhere for a while, is what I'm hearing."
I dread this happening to me. It'd be the pits.
A good plot premise, there
You either become David Icke. Or you found Mormonism.
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
As a general rule, scandals don't affect voting very much. (Yes, I know: 'Tory sleaze' in the 1990s. But that was with master propagandist Alastair Campbell exploiting the opportunity. Starmer's lot: not so much..)
Dom in Durham was unusual in that regard. There were some distinctive features about that one though. For a start, there was literally no other news that week, because we were still in mega-lockdown. The news was "Remain indoors, unlike the PM's advisor. The weather doesn't matter, because you are remaining indoors." That won't happen this time, things have started to happen again. The blatant sauce of not resigning is there, but all those who care have already left the government. Those who are sticking by their men will make their rationalisations. Much of the fury at Domski was because he went ahead and did things that lots of people wanted to do, but honourably didn't. There will be people with that anger at Matt Hanky-Panky, and sex is a powerful force... but most people weren't affected by that restriction.
Conclusion: he should go, the PM is a fool and terrible person for not making him go, but he won't and eventually everyone will wander off. Unless this is the chip of grit that unexpectedly shatters the windscreen of government.
Greg Parmley, chief executive of industry body LIVE, says he is "pleased that there were no Covid outbreaks associated with any of the pilots detected".
"It is completely unfair that our industry finds itself stuck in seemingly-interminable rounds of research before we can open when no such research is being done for other places, such as restaurants, shops or public transport."
He says: "With sensible mitigations, including simple Covid-certification, there is no reason why we should not be able to reopen on 19 July."
I’ve just read Leon’s fake cnn tweet out to my wife and she’s walked off before I could tell her it was a joker online making it up
Imagine if CNN DO say something like that in the next hour or two. How would people react?!
Well I can tell you because my wife doesn’t know it was you making it up. She thought it was a tweet from cnn. She said “oh I figured as much. Anyway I have to go and check on the casserole”.
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
She has been up to speed with the story for a long time but prefers not to dwell on it.
I reckon Elizondo is right. If this disclosure ever occurs (an almighty IF, of course), it will be a truly Sombre Thing
Those that don't ignore it will be sobered, or frightened. Panicked?
I have no idea if the US Military (or anyone else) does have this knowledge, but if they did, it would indeed be a tremendous responsibility: how do you release it? How do you prep homo sapiens for such a shocking revelation?
What I've often thought would be terrible is if an Alien - ET, say, or a Dalek - visited just YOU. Came to see just you, introduced itself, had a chat, then said "spread the word" and disappeared.
Where does that leave you? With a straight (extremely unpalatable) choice. Ignore the instruction and keep an unbearable secret that will render your life unmanageable. Or obey and be chalked down - even by those you love - as a total nutcase.
"Oh god, what's happened to Simon is such a tragedy. He might have to go somewhere for a while, is what I'm hearing."
I dread this happening to me. It'd be the pits.
A good plot premise, there
Happened about 2,000 years ago, I believe. Told the chap to tell everyone to be nice to one another.
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
the number we're doing is not going to get any higher unless they use Az again.
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
It's not that. Partly most of us are just sceptical because of the "cry wolf" thing - people have claimed to see aliens forever, but nothing seems to happen. But also it fails the "how will this affect us?" test. It's a bit like God - yes, I accept they (sic) may exist, but in the apparent absence of any actual divine intervention, what difference does it make, really? Quite interesting, like theories on the start of the universe, but hard to get excited about.
Now if the aliens were going to intervene to get George Galloway elected, you'd get us really worried...
I disagree, in part
I can see many people shrugging at first; however, over time, the impact of this revelation would change us all, profoundly. It impacts all of human life - from science to religion to politics. It’s covid times a million
5 or 10 years after the Disclosure human civilization would be altered in ways we can’t imagine
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
I'm sure that Cookie is right, but as an MP I met all kinds, and they too vary in intensity. Went to one all-Muslim meeting where one participant argued furiously that it should be illegal to make fun of the Koran. I said that any such law would need to apply to other books that people considered holy too - the Bible, for instance - would he favour that? He paused in mid-flow, hesitated, and said "I suppose so." The others around him looked unsure about the whole thing and moved on to other subjects. One needs to recognise nuance and work on it, not stand back in horror and condemn everyone in sight.
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Greg Parmley, chief executive of industry body LIVE, says he is "pleased that there were no Covid outbreaks associated with any of the pilots detected".
"It is completely unfair that our industry finds itself stuck in seemingly-interminable rounds of research before we can open when no such research is being done for other places, such as restaurants, shops or public transport."
He says: "With sensible mitigations, including simple Covid-certification, there is no reason why we should not be able to reopen on 19 July."
I don't think nightclub bosses/indoor gig particularly care at this point, they just want to be able to open covid passport or no covid passport.
Soon we should be into the point where a 3 week gap can be recommended (It can't be done yet, see Paul Mainwood on this) and it'd increase uptake amongst the young who have to show ID to gain entry anyway.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
It's not that. Partly most of us are just sceptical because of the "cry wolf" thing - people have claimed to see aliens forever, but nothing seems to happen. But also it fails the "how will this affect us?" test. It's a bit like God - yes, I accept they (sic) may exist, but in the apparent absence of any actual divine intervention, what difference does it make, really? Quite interesting, like theories on the start of the universe, but hard to get excited about.
Now if the aliens were going to intervene to get George Galloway elected, you'd get us really worried...
I disagree, in part
I can see many people shrugging at first; however, over time, the impact of this revelation would change us all, profoundly. It impacts all of human life - from science to religion to politics. It’s covid times a million
5 or 10 years after the Disclosure human civilization would be altered in ways we can’t imagine
Yeah I think this is right. The world is full of very smart and enterprising minds. Even if the world’s governments didn’t publicly express any intention of initiating Contact, a group somewhere would work to figure out how to do it and what to say.
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
It's not that. Partly most of us are just sceptical because of the "cry wolf" thing - people have claimed to see aliens forever, but nothing seems to happen. But also it fails the "how will this affect us?" test. It's a bit like God - yes, I accept they (sic) may exist, but in the apparent absence of any actual divine intervention, what difference does it make, really? Quite interesting, like theories on the start of the universe, but hard to get excited about.
Now if the aliens were going to intervene to get George Galloway elected, you'd get us really worried...
I disagree, in part
I can see many people shrugging at first; however, over time, the impact of this revelation would change us all, profoundly. It impacts all of human life - from science to religion to politics. It’s covid times a million
5 or 10 years after the Disclosure human civilization would be altered in ways we can’t imagine
Yeah I think this is right. The world is full of very smart and enterprising minds. Even if the world’s governments didn’t publicly express any intention of initiating Contact, a group somewhere would work to figure out how to do it and what to say.
'We went MONTHS without hugging our families!' - Piers Morgan
Hold on there Mr Moron....you went to the Caribbean for no other reason than winter sun and your son bent the elastic of the rules to snapping point on a number of occasions with your help, including so you could all spend time together in the winter sun. And I am to believe that you didn't hug him after all the limbo dancing around the rules to get him there?
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
So 90% isn't enough, in your view? That is putting a very high bar on such things.
'We went MONTHS without hugging our families!' - Piers Morgan
Hold on there Mr Moron....you went to the Caribbean for no other reason than winter sun and your son bent the elastic of the rules to snapping point on a number of occasions with your help, including so you could all spend time together in the winter sun. And I am to believe that you didn't hug him after all the limbo dancing around the rules?
'We went MONTHS without hugging our families!' - Piers Morgan
Hold on there Mr Moron....you went to the Caribbean for no other reason than winter sun and your son bent the elastic of the rules to snapping point on a number of occasions with your help, including so you could all spend time together in the winter sun. And I am to believe that you didn't hug him after all the limbo dancing around the rules?
Would you hug your Dad if he were Piers Morgan?
If he was my dad, I would be bending the rules to ensure I didn't see him.....
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
It's not that. Partly most of us are just sceptical because of the "cry wolf" thing - people have claimed to see aliens forever, but nothing seems to happen. But also it fails the "how will this affect us?" test. It's a bit like God - yes, I accept they (sic) may exist, but in the apparent absence of any actual divine intervention, what difference does it make, really? Quite interesting, like theories on the start of the universe, but hard to get excited about.
Now if the aliens were going to intervene to get George Galloway elected, you'd get us really worried...
I disagree, in part
I can see many people shrugging at first; however, over time, the impact of this revelation would change us all, profoundly. It impacts all of human life - from science to religion to politics. It’s covid times a million
5 or 10 years after the Disclosure human civilization would be altered in ways we can’t imagine
Yeah I think this is right. The world is full of very smart and enterprising minds. Even if the world’s governments didn’t publicly express any intention of initiating Contact, a group somewhere would work to figure out how to do it and what to say.
I've been super busy recently - too busy to follow politics and current affairs at all really. I think I've been fortunate, because it seems to have spared me a lot of frustration with our current Government. They're done really aren't they?
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
As a general rule, scandals don't affect voting very much. (Yes, I know: 'Tory sleaze' in the 1990s. But that was with master propagandist Alastair Campbell exploiting the opportunity. Starmer's lot: not so much..)
Dom in Durham was unusual in that regard. There were some distinctive features about that one though. For a start, there was literally no other news that week, because we were still in mega-lockdown. The news was "Remain indoors, unlike the PM's advisor. The weather doesn't matter, because you are remaining indoors." That won't happen this time, things have started to happen again. The blatant sauce of not resigning is there, but all those who care have already left the government. Those who are sticking by their men will make their rationalisations. Much of the fury at Domski was because he went ahead and did things that lots of people wanted to do, but honourably didn't. There will be people with that anger at Matt Hanky-Panky, and sex is a powerful force... but most people weren't affected by that restriction.
Conclusion: he should go, the PM is a fool and terrible person for not making him go, but he won't and eventually everyone will wander off. Unless this is the chip of grit that unexpectedly shatters the windscreen of government.
I think the one thing we now know is that Boris won't fire people for things he has done himself. Which at least shows some honesty.
The Cummings screw up wasthsg he could have killed it by resigning after ensuring Boris was aware of the resignation and had (the very valid at the time) reasons for refusing to accept it. What that showed me is neither are good at crisis management
Yes, it's fascinating. I bet many people - most? - would react exactly like that. A puzzled frown, then a shrug, back to the football
JUST THE BIGGEST BREAKING NEWS STORY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD
Maybe some news stories are just TOO big to be taken in?
It's not that. Partly most of us are just sceptical because of the "cry wolf" thing - people have claimed to see aliens forever, but nothing seems to happen. But also it fails the "how will this affect us?" test. It's a bit like God - yes, I accept they (sic) may exist, but in the apparent absence of any actual divine intervention, what difference does it make, really? Quite interesting, like theories on the start of the universe, but hard to get excited about.
Now if the aliens were going to intervene to get George Galloway elected, you'd get us really worried...
I disagree, in part
I can see many people shrugging at first; however, over time, the impact of this revelation would change us all, profoundly. It impacts all of human life - from science to religion to politics. It’s covid times a million
5 or 10 years after the Disclosure human civilization would be altered in ways we can’t imagine
Yeah I think this is right. The world is full of very smart and enterprising minds. Even if the world’s governments didn’t publicly express any intention of initiating Contact, a group somewhere would work to figure out how to do it and what to say.
"Is the PS5 in stock on your planet?"
A PS5 is like a unicorn, everybody talks about them, everybody knows what they look like in theory, but nobody has ever seen one in person.
Someone mentioned Major as an unlikely Casanova upthread.
I am currently reading “A Classless Society”, Alwyn Turner’s history of Britain in the 90s. Slightly uncanny to be reading a history of events I can remember *experiencing*.
Anyway, Turner refers to the sly, weird allure Major had on women - something actually noted at the time, despite the Spitting Image caricature of pea-eating greyness.
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
I'm sure that Cookie is right, but as an MP I met all kinds, and they too vary in intensity. Went to one all-Muslim meeting where one participant argued furiously that it should be illegal to make fun of the Koran. I said that any such law would need to apply to other books that people considered holy too - the Bible, for instance - would he favour that? He paused in mid-flow, hesitated, and said "I suppose so." The others around him looked unsure about the whole thing and moved on to other subjects. One needs to recognise nuance and work on it, not stand back in horror and condemn everyone in sight.
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Islam needs to have a bit more fun and far, far fewer wars. Guardian readers need a good war or two.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
Is "Most Muslims are homophobic" a tell of islamophobia, or just a datum?
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
I'm sure that Cookie is right, but as an MP I met all kinds, and they too vary in intensity. Went to one all-Muslim meeting where one participant argued furiously that it should be illegal to make fun of the Koran. I said that any such law would need to apply to other books that people considered holy too - the Bible, for instance - would he favour that? He paused in mid-flow, hesitated, and said "I suppose so." The others around him looked unsure about the whole thing and moved on to other subjects. One needs to recognise nuance and work on it, not stand back in horror and condemn everyone in sight.
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Islam needs to have a bit more fun and far, far fewer wars. Guardian readers need a good war or two.
It's true: at least with Evangelical pastors in the US, they might preach against sodomy, drugs, prostitution, homesexuality and extra-marital sex, but at least they mostly engage in those practices themselves.
Where the story of the "E" popping, hooker banging Iman?
A complete offtopic anecdote but I will post here for reference
The 2 child limit for Working Tax Credits came into being in April 2017. Checking 2 different schools it seems reception admissions for September 2021 are 15% lower than September 2020...
Am interesting example of the lack of joined up thinking in politics is that the same people who complain about immigration are often the same people who won't do anything to maintain the birth rate. I've got three kids anyway, so I've done my bit.
Perhaps xenophobia saps the libido. It makes a weird sort of sense if you think about it.
(Cookie voted leave and has three daughters - though clearly that is only a comment on quantity, not quality)
Giles Fraser? Oh no! Not my cup of char at all. Sense something slightly 'off' with him. Mucho words, very little meaning, bit vacuous, based on when I've caught him on the Moral Maze. Typical preacher, I guess.
But, ok, on the serious point, I exempt you (obviously) but I was thinking more about the proper gammons. They can't be very potent in the sack because the blood always runs to their face when they get worked up. That's where I was coming from with this.
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
I'm sure that Cookie is right, but as an MP I met all kinds, and they too vary in intensity. Went to one all-Muslim meeting where one participant argued furiously that it should be illegal to make fun of the Koran. I said that any such law would need to apply to other books that people considered holy too - the Bible, for instance - would he favour that? He paused in mid-flow, hesitated, and said "I suppose so." The others around him looked unsure about the whole thing and moved on to other subjects. One needs to recognise nuance and work on it, not stand back in horror and condemn everyone in sight.
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Islam needs to have a bit more fun and far, far fewer wars. Guardian readers need a good war or two.
It's true: at least with Evangelical pastors in the US, they might preach against sodomy, drugs, prostitution, homesexuality and extra-marital sex, but at least they mostly engage in those practices themselves.
Where the story of the "E" popping, hooker banging Iman?
Who can forget the Crystal Methodist of the Co-Op bank.....
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
As a general rule, scandals don't affect voting very much. (Yes, I know: 'Tory sleaze' in the 1990s. But that was with master propagandist Alastair Campbell exploiting the opportunity. Starmer's lot: not so much..)
Dom in Durham was unusual in that regard. There were some distinctive features about that one though. For a start, there was literally no other news that week, because we were still in mega-lockdown. The news was "Remain indoors, unlike the PM's advisor. The weather doesn't matter, because you are remaining indoors." That won't happen this time, things have started to happen again. The blatant sauce of not resigning is there, but all those who care have already left the government. Those who are sticking by their men will make their rationalisations. Much of the fury at Domski was because he went ahead and did things that lots of people wanted to do, but honourably didn't. There will be people with that anger at Matt Hanky-Panky, and sex is a powerful force... but most people weren't affected by that restriction.
Conclusion: he should go, the PM is a fool and terrible person for not making him go, but he won't and eventually everyone will wander off. Unless this is the chip of grit that unexpectedly shatters the windscreen of government.
I think this will be one of those occasions where the clamour for him to go will prove irresistible. I don't think it will shatter the government, but it will finally shatter Matt Hancock. And (along with the Uefa delegates issue) hopefully also shatter observation of the remaining restrictions.
It's not the having an affair, it's the doing the sort of thing that people have been longing to do and have been piously told not to, by Matt Hancock.
If the comments of PB Tories, PB Tory sympathisers and ex-Tories, and PB centrists are anything to go by, it looks to me like Hancock will struggle to stay in post, despite the PM attempting to shrug it off.
Although we're a weird lot, I don't think PBers are so out of tune that we don't reflect the mood of the public (or Tory MPs) on occasions like this.
For once, the handful of us on the left are quite enjoying this. Such pleasure has been very rare recently.
Imo, the PM is not attempting to shrug it off, but leaking story by story to get Hancock to resign, so he does not need to sack him.
The HMQ "poor man" story is interesting in that regard.
Re George Galloway: it is worth remember that Batley & Spen is a lot less Muslim than either Bradford West or Bethnel Green & Bow.
In Bradford West, the population is 51% Muslim, and he got 56%. In Bethnal Green & Bow, the population is 35% Muslim, and he got 36% of the vote.
Even if we assume that he outperforms the 19% of the population that is Muslim, it's hard to see how Galloway could get more than 25-26%. And that's surely nowhere near enough, given the Conservatives should easily clear 35%.
Differential turnout is GG's friend. I reckon he has about a 1 in 7 chance of winning.
Whenever I type GG I mentally pronounce it 'Gigi'. That is Galloway's new name in my head.
That is my take re the differentiated turnout. I would agree he doesn't have the demographics in a normal election but, in a low turnout one, it could make the difference.
Plus the by-election is two days after the England v Germany match. Can't see that helping Labour (England loses, people still in a bad mood and don't bother voting; England win and BJ gets to wave the flag).
Were I George Galloway, I would be printing 15k leaflets showing that Julia HB picture of the Queen at the funeral and Grabcock hard at work. And carpet bomb them at the Tory wards.
They don’t need to vote for him, they just need to not turn up.
Agreed, the Tories are now his main target. Personally, I think Labour are a busted flush in B&S but famous last words etc etc. I still cannot see why anyone would actually bother to vote Labour at the current time.
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
As a general rule, scandals don't affect voting very much. (Yes, I know: 'Tory sleaze' in the 1990s. But that was with master propagandist Alastair Campbell exploiting the opportunity. Starmer's lot: not so much..)
Dom in Durham was unusual in that regard. There were some distinctive features about that one though. For a start, there was literally no other news that week, because we were still in mega-lockdown. The news was "Remain indoors, unlike the PM's advisor. The weather doesn't matter, because you are remaining indoors." That won't happen this time, things have started to happen again. The blatant sauce of not resigning is there, but all those who care have already left the government. Those who are sticking by their men will make their rationalisations. Much of the fury at Domski was because he went ahead and did things that lots of people wanted to do, but honourably didn't. There will be people with that anger at Matt Hanky-Panky, and sex is a powerful force... but most people weren't affected by that restriction.
Conclusion: he should go, the PM is a fool and terrible person for not making him go, but he won't and eventually everyone will wander off. Unless this is the chip of grit that unexpectedly shatters the windscreen of government.
I think this will be one of those occasions where the clamour for him to go will prove irresistible. I don't think it will shatter the government, but it will finally shatter Matt Hancock. And (along with the Uefa delegates issue) hopefully also shatter observation of the remaining restrictions.
It's not the having an affair, it's the doing the sort of thing that people have been longing to do and have been piously told not to, by Matt Hancock.
If he had any honour he'd step down, back bench for a while and can come back in a couple of years time into Dominic Raab's first cabinet. But then they don't resign nowadays do they?
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
I'm not up on the latest definitions but I think the latter example (Jews/Israel) would probably be true for the majority of British Jews. Israel is a Jewish homeland, the Jewish homeland and hence I can't see anti-semitism in that statement as I would take it to mean the majority of British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel. 100%? No. But a majority.
As to your first example, I would apply the same thinking. 100%? No. But a majority? No idea but would it be Islamophobic to say so. Have there been polls? I would be amazed if it was a majority and that is where the islamophobia would come in to conflate "some" with "all". But I don't think the test is 100%.
But perhaps I am out of touch and need re-educating.
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
I'm sure that Cookie is right, but as an MP I met all kinds, and they too vary in intensity. Went to one all-Muslim meeting where one participant argued furiously that it should be illegal to make fun of the Koran. I said that any such law would need to apply to other books that people considered holy too - the Bible, for instance - would he favour that? He paused in mid-flow, hesitated, and said "I suppose so." The others around him looked unsure about the whole thing and moved on to other subjects. One needs to recognise nuance and work on it, not stand back in horror and condemn everyone in sight.
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Islam needs to have a bit more fun and far, far fewer wars. Guardian readers need a good war or two.
It's true: at least with Evangelical pastors in the US, they might preach against sodomy, drugs, prostitution, homesexuality and extra-marital sex, but at least they mostly engage in those practices themselves.
Where the story of the "E" popping, hooker banging Iman?
Yeah I wasn't quite at that level - I was more Imams smiling at the sunset. Muslim women allowing the same sunshine into their hair. Small but easily controllable fires in the beards of the dipsticks.
I agree with @isam. If you are sympathetic towards the Cons but are anti-Hancock then you might not vote for them in B&S. I have had a nibble on Lab and also on GG.
As a general rule, scandals don't affect voting very much. (Yes, I know: 'Tory sleaze' in the 1990s. But that was with master propagandist Alastair Campbell exploiting the opportunity. Starmer's lot: not so much..)
Dom in Durham was unusual in that regard. There were some distinctive features about that one though. For a start, there was literally no other news that week, because we were still in mega-lockdown. The news was "Remain indoors, unlike the PM's advisor. The weather doesn't matter, because you are remaining indoors." That won't happen this time, things have started to happen again. The blatant sauce of not resigning is there, but all those who care have already left the government. Those who are sticking by their men will make their rationalisations. Much of the fury at Domski was because he went ahead and did things that lots of people wanted to do, but honourably didn't. There will be people with that anger at Matt Hanky-Panky, and sex is a powerful force... but most people weren't affected by that restriction.
Conclusion: he should go, the PM is a fool and terrible person for not making him go, but he won't and eventually everyone will wander off. Unless this is the chip of grit that unexpectedly shatters the windscreen of government.
I think this will be one of those occasions where the clamour for him to go will prove irresistible. I don't think it will shatter the government, but it will finally shatter Matt Hancock. And (along with the Uefa delegates issue) hopefully also shatter observation of the remaining restrictions.
It's not the having an affair, it's the doing the sort of thing that people have been longing to do and have been piously told not to, by Matt Hancock.
Indeed, this is far worse than Dom going to Barnard Castle. Especially coming a week after it transpires that Hancock had deliberately sat on data that could have seen us out of lockdown last week. Indeed, if he hadn't done so, he'd have only had his wife to answer to for this.
Middle class people like me, and perhaps OLB tend to know, disproportionately, middle class Muslims with fairly western views. It gives us an impression that Muslims are more western than is typically the case. But clearly these are not terribly representative.
That's certainly true. A Muslim former Goldman colleague of mine was going through a miserable divorce at the time of the gay marriage debate, and came up with the line "Marriage is fucking awful. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
I'm sure that Cookie is right, but as an MP I met all kinds, and they too vary in intensity. Went to one all-Muslim meeting where one participant argued furiously that it should be illegal to make fun of the Koran. I said that any such law would need to apply to other books that people considered holy too - the Bible, for instance - would he favour that? He paused in mid-flow, hesitated, and said "I suppose so." The others around him looked unsure about the whole thing and moved on to other subjects. One needs to recognise nuance and work on it, not stand back in horror and condemn everyone in sight.
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Islam needs to have a bit more fun and far, far fewer wars. Guardian readers need a good war or two.
It's true: at least with Evangelical pastors in the US, they might preach against sodomy, drugs, prostitution, homesexuality and extra-marital sex, but at least they mostly engage in those practices themselves.
Where the story of the "E" popping, hooker banging Iman?
Completely O/T - but i don't suppose anyone has had any further news today in relation to DavidL? It's all very concerning if not.
Yes, was rather concerning about @DavidL. Hope he’s okay and in hospital.
Yes, that was scary
Has anyone heard from him?
I am pleased to report that tales of my demise are somewhat exaggerated. I took the advice on here last night and called 999. I spent a somewhat uncomfortable night but feel somewhat better today. Still waiting for a scan but it looks like a blood clot. Thanks very much for the concern, it was much appreciated.
Glad to hear from you.
But blood clots are no joke. So take care of yourself and get some rest. We want your wit and wisdom on here.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
Is "Most Muslims are homophobic" a tell of islamophobia, or just a datum?
It depends on who is saying it and how often, and in what tone and context. But it's a probable yes. Somebody going around with "Most Muslims are homophobic" as their catchphrase is likely to be an anti-Muslim bigot. But it does honestly depend. It's case by case, like all this stuff. And I'm the go-to. No, strike that, I'm not. I could be - I have the ear - but I'm not up for it. I'm able but not willing. Don't want the responsibility. It ages you.
Just come back from a meeting of a u3a Reading Group. 4 'older' ladies and me. We never only discuss the book we're supposed to, and no-one had a good word to say for Matt Hancock, either on the marital or 'example' front. I don't think anyone thought Boris would sack him, though.
Not sure how they all normally vote; one is definitely Labour but I've never, and won't ever, ask the others. Suspect two are Tory voters; this is Witham, after all!
The book we were supposed to be discussing was Edward St Aubyn's 'Patrick Melrose', which none of us liked, and which several of us, including the 'write-ins' gave a very nasty view of 'upper class' society.
God we are a country of lily-livered aren't we...its 10 sodding days, watch sodding Netflix, piss about on the internet. It hardly like you are in solitary Steve McQueen stylee.
The food situation in the quarantine hotels does seem to be awful. I heard from my colleague who went through it that they would hear people in other rooms shouting out at midnight that they still hadn't received any food for the evening.
There's no excuse for not being able to run the places properly, but some mate of the government has the contract and their determined to wring as much money from it as possible.
I do wonder whether this "government by contracts to mates from uni" will finally do for this shower?
I hope that happens before Dido Harding takes over as head of the NHS. Someone with her record at TalkTalk should never have been allowed anywhere near public office. But no. A case of "Great CV you've got there, Dido". Hello to the Track and Trace fiasco... and now CEO of the NHS? Putin would blush!
It might make it harder for Hancock to hire her now. Unless she's already been promised the job.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
So 90% isn't enough, in your view? That is putting a very high bar on such things.
Has to be 93% for me. 92 at a pinch. But it's not really possible to agree a definite and exact threshold. As I say, it's case by case and it depends on who and how often, and the tone and the context. And you do need to have an ear for it.
Excellent Covid numbers from an England hospitals perspective today.
The total number in hospital with Covid in England is 1,284, which is up 10 from yesterday, and below the peak of 1,301 achieved on Tuesday.
Week-over-week growth continues to sharply decelerate, and is now under 10%.
Most encouragingly of all, bed usage in the North West - the nexus of Delta Covid - continues to retreat and is only up 4% from the level achieved a week ago.
Yeah it looks like Delta is tamed in most of the country. I think the high number of prior infections in places like London will end up helping keep it at bay.
Is "Most Muslims are homophobic" a tell of islamophobia, or just a datum?
It depends on who is saying it and how often, and in what tone and context. But it's a probable yes. Somebody going around with "Most Muslims are homophobic" as their catchphrase is likely to be an anti-Muslim bigot. But it does honestly depend. It's case by case, like all this stuff. And I'm the go-to. No, strike that, I'm not. I could be - I have the ear - but I'm not up for it. I'm able but not willing. Don't want the responsibility. It ages you.
As a "catchphrase", I'm sure you're right.
But what about it someone was talking psephologically; looking at a by-election seat that has a considerable Muslim population who usually vote Labour, and a gay Labour candidate?
What if it was, somehow, just like that; would it be a "tell" to your ra-cist-dar for someone in that context to contend that most Muslims are homophobic and consider how that might affect the result?
Yesterday saw 221,534 first doses given and 177,813 second jabs......
This getting worse..
We are deep into the dregs of people that can’t be arsed getting vaccinated. If you want a million a day you’re going to have to wait for third doses to kick in to the stats.
I don't believe that is correct. Apparently several million have booked for jabs, but not enough capacity to get through them, many have been given appointments several weeks away.
I relay don't believe that 7 million have booked a job (first jab), there are only 9 and a bit million unjaded adults, so unless only 2 million are not taking it 7 million does not make sense. at around 200,000 first jabs a day, 7 million would imply we are fully booked for 5 weeks, the longest wait Iv heard on here was for 2 weeks and most have been less than that.
Perhaps it was 7 million have not yet booked, implying that 2 million have booked but not had one yet, which would imply 10 days to go, some areas more some less, A few more will book in that time so perhaps 2 to 3 weeks, which will take up to around 47.5 million first doses which is about 90%.
But always open to new information where did you hear/see that 7 million waiting number do you have a link?
The far left are all to eager to do anything to bring down Starmer, and labour themselves are too weak to stand up to homophobes and extremists as they are desperate for any votes they can get.
Very very nasty stuff especially in a seat which has the history it has with her sister.
It's the inevitable end point of the identity politics path Labour chose to embark on. Now it will likely hurt them. Boo bloody hoo.
It's the fact that it hurts the rest of us that is the big problem.
Is "Most Muslims are homophobic" a tell of islamophobia, or just a datum?
It depends on who is saying it and how often, and in what tone and context. But it's a probable yes. Somebody going around with "Most Muslims are homophobic" as their catchphrase is likely to be an anti-Muslim bigot. But it does honestly depend. It's case by case, like all this stuff. And I'm the go-to. No, strike that, I'm not. I could be - I have the ear - but I'm not up for it. I'm able but not willing. Don't want the responsibility. It ages you.
As a "catchphrase", I'm sure you're right.
But what about it someone was talking psephologically; looking at a by-election seat that has a considerable Muslim population who usually vote Labour, and a gay Labour candidate?
What if it was, somehow, just like that; would it be a "tell" to your ra-cist-dar for someone in that context to contend that most Muslims are homophobic and consider how that might affect the result?
Probably not. But I'd still have to see it. Eg, if the person was kind of reveling in having this allah given opportunity to declare (under the guise of desiccated commentary) that most - or even many - Muslims are homophobic, that would be problematic and a tell. This is why it's case by case and you need the ear.
Just seen a clip of Ledbetter being harangued in Batley and Spen. Vile stuff
Do you mind me asking, by whom, and for what?
Was it activists form a different party?
I'm assuming it's from voters Labour would consider 'theirs' and fits in to the pattern of ignoring homophobia or anti-semitism if its electorally damaging to challenge it that they've gone for.
Labour really are completely fucked. Either they try and keep the conservative Muslim vote on board (but how? How do they square this with Wokeness??) or they abandon them and lose several million voters in one go
When the woke types feel comfortable calling out Islamic misogyny and homophobia, we might be approaching assimilation. Letting them off because of their religion, or that they’re their enemies enemy proves multiculturalism isn’t working.
Conservative Islam is backward and reprehensible in its attitude to women and homosexuality.
That was easy, wasn't it.
The fact you had to add ‘Conservative’ makes me feel like it wouldn’t be easy to say it without caveats
If you said it without caveat it would be anti-Muslim bigotry.
Which then leads to the question - at what level of belief is it acceptable to generalise about a group.
If group A has X% holding a belief Y, at what level of X does it become acceptable to say "Group A believes Y"
100% 90% 80%
and so on?
My opinion? -
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
I'm not up on the latest definitions but I think the latter example (Jews/Israel) would probably be true for the majority of British Jews. Israel is a Jewish homeland, the Jewish homeland and hence I can't see anti-semitism in that statement as I would take it to mean the majority of British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel. 100%? No. But a majority.
As to your first example, I would apply the same thinking. 100%? No. But a majority? No idea but would it be Islamophobic to say so. Have there been polls? I would be amazed if it was a majority and that is where the islamophobia would come in to conflate "some" with "all". But I don't think the test is 100%.
But perhaps I am out of touch and need re-educating.
No, you're on the button. But what I mean is, if you EQUATE jewishness with love of Israel that's a tell of antisemitism. Not absolute proof, just a tell. A tell is less than absolute proof but more than an indicator. That's how I use the word anyway.
Comments
should get the sack -- interesting perhaps, since this Govt always argues the 'media elite' are out of touch etc. with grassroots/Red Wall etc.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15390073/matt-hancock-affair-news-latest-gina-coladengelo-live/ https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1408453359485558784/photo/1
But it also cuts both ways: highly conservative, speak Bangladeshi at home, go to the Mosque every week, etc may be a large share of the Muslim population, but they are far from 100%.
England 83.1
NI 79.3
Scotland 83.7
Wales 89.1
At the current pace, we will be on 90% in England in 17 days or so. Scotland a little later, Wales will be there in 9 days or so - if they keep up their steady trickle... NI is a long way behind.
"The woman Matt Hancock allegedly had an affair with is a millionaire mother-of-three who met Mr Hancock at Oxford University where they became close friends over a shared passion for student radio."
Extraordinary. Absolutely extraordinary.
Hancock got into Oxford.
The company specialises in contracted out GP services, something that Hancock was promoting from his fist days in office. Who better to have as Director of Strategy than the brother of his advisor and "close friend".
Cronyism is a centrepiece of this government.
The government have already said that supply is limiting things for Pfizer, and Moderna I believe they are nearly through all the deliveries they will get for now.
Got to be the most bizarre affair in British politics since John Major and Edwina...
Only an innumerate can say Labour are doing well at the moment, but they've been unlucky/foolish in the places where the by-elections have landed.
Also, I feel that if there was a shortage with several million waiting, we probably wouldn't have the capacity to do walk ins on this scale.
Plus the by-election is two days after the England v Germany match. Can't see that helping Labour (England loses, people still in a bad mood and don't bother voting; England win and BJ gets to wave the flag).
Can't see the Cons getting into the forties. I don't think they even managed that back in Elizabeth Peacock's day. (?). And right now doesn't feel like the political climate in which people are clamouring to ho out and vote Conservative. I reckon the rag tag and bobtail of the right will get a not inconsiderable number of votes. And yes, realignment, but also the seat has changed demographically since the 80s not necessarily in the blues' favour.
My prediction FWIW (not much) is Con 31, Lab 25, Gigi 22.
30 somethings are only at 61% first doses on NIMS population data. They can creep it up a bit I’m sure but it’s diminishing returns stuff now.
40 somethings are at 76% 1st doses, they’ll be lucky to eke another couple of percent out of that in this phase of the programme you’d have thought.
They don’t need to vote for him, they just need to not turn up.
A photograph of it would have been a sensation though.
And welcome.
For a start, there was literally no other news that week, because we were still in mega-lockdown. The news was "Remain indoors, unlike the PM's advisor. The weather doesn't matter, because you are remaining indoors." That won't happen this time, things have started to happen again.
The blatant sauce of not resigning is there, but all those who care have already left the government. Those who are sticking by their men will make their rationalisations.
Much of the fury at Domski was because he went ahead and did things that lots of people wanted to do, but honourably didn't. There will be people with that anger at Matt Hanky-Panky, and sex is a powerful force... but most people weren't affected by that restriction.
Conclusion: he should go, the PM is a fool and terrible person for not making him go, but he won't and eventually everyone will wander off. Unless this is the chip of grit that unexpectedly shatters the windscreen of government.
"It is completely unfair that our industry finds itself stuck in seemingly-interminable rounds of research before we can open when no such research is being done for other places, such as restaurants, shops or public transport."
He says: "With sensible mitigations, including simple Covid-certification, there is no reason why we should not be able to reopen on 19 July."
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-57607679
I thought everybody was against covid passports?
Didn't really work as expected.
I can see many people shrugging at first; however, over time, the impact of this revelation would change us all, profoundly. It impacts all of human life - from science to religion to politics. It’s covid times a million
5 or 10 years after the Disclosure human civilization would be altered in ways we can’t imagine
The same applies to WWC people with views that Guardian readers would recoil from. You have to engage.
Soon we should be into the point where a 3 week gap can be recommended (It can't be done yet, see Paul Mainwood on this) and it'd increase uptake amongst the young who have to show ID to gain entry anyway.
"Muslims are homophobic" only works if it's close to 100%.
Which it isn't. So you go with "Homophobia is more prevalent amongst British Muslims than amongst the general population."
Saying the first (especially if you make a big deal of it when you normally don't give a toss about LGBT rights) is a tell of islamophobia.
And should we do a balancer for context? Yes, why not.
"British Jews are emotionally attached to Israel." - No. That's a tell of antisemitism.
"There is more attachment to Israel amongst British Jews than amongst the general population." - Ok.
Hold on there Mr Moron....you went to the Caribbean for no other reason than winter sun and your son bent the elastic of the rules to snapping point on a number of occasions with your help, including so you could all spend time together in the winter sun. And I am to believe that you didn't hug him after all the limbo dancing around the rules to get him there?
The Cummings screw up wasthsg he could have killed it by resigning after ensuring Boris was aware of the resignation and had (the very valid at the time) reasons for refusing to accept it. What that showed me is neither are good at crisis management
I am currently reading “A Classless Society”, Alwyn Turner’s history of Britain in the 90s. Slightly uncanny to be reading a history of events I can remember *experiencing*.
Anyway, Turner refers to the sly, weird allure Major had on women - something actually noted at the time, despite the Spitting Image caricature of pea-eating greyness.
Where the story of the "E" popping, hooker banging Iman?
But, ok, on the serious point, I exempt you (obviously) but I was thinking more about the proper gammons. They can't be very potent in the sack because the blood always runs to their face when they get worked up. That's where I was coming from with this.
It's not the having an affair, it's the doing the sort of thing that people have been longing to do and have been piously told not to, by Matt Hancock.
As to your first example, I would apply the same thinking. 100%? No. But a majority? No idea but would it be Islamophobic to say so. Have there been polls? I would be amazed if it was a majority and that is where the islamophobia would come in to conflate "some" with "all". But I don't think the test is 100%.
But perhaps I am out of touch and need re-educating.
But blood clots are no joke. So take care of yourself and get some rest. We want your wit and wisdom on here.
NEW THREAD
I don't think anyone thought Boris would sack him, though.
Not sure how they all normally vote; one is definitely Labour but I've never, and won't ever, ask the others. Suspect two are Tory voters; this is Witham, after all!
The book we were supposed to be discussing was Edward St Aubyn's 'Patrick Melrose', which none of us liked, and which several of us, including the 'write-ins' gave a very nasty view of 'upper class' society.
But what about it someone was talking psephologically; looking at a by-election seat that has a considerable Muslim population who usually vote Labour, and a gay Labour candidate?
What if it was, somehow, just like that; would it be a "tell" to your ra-cist-dar for someone in that context to contend that most Muslims are homophobic and consider how that might affect the result?
Perhaps it was 7 million have not yet booked, implying that 2 million have booked but not had one yet, which would imply 10 days to go, some areas more some less, A few more will book in that time so perhaps 2 to 3 weeks, which will take up to around 47.5 million first doses which is about 90%.
But always open to new information where did you hear/see that 7 million waiting number do you have a link?
It's the fact that it hurts the rest of us that is the big problem.
If the media were scrutinised especially the Dail Mail and the Sun, closely followed by tje Guardian and the Teleraph there wouid be carnage.