politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Scoping the damage of the Cummings road trip and Johnson’s dec
Comments
-
How the Mail covered two of the incidents:
https://twitter.com/ruthiesun/status/1272445838099275777?s=200 -
-
Of course it isn't racist as several of us have set out to you. Are crayons required so that we can draw you a picture? You are defending petty white racists calling black people dogs. Are all white people petty? No. Do you have to be white to be petty? No. So we can discard the racism accusation. But what they were saying had no qualifiers, it was "blacks". And you are repeatedly defending them.BluestBlue said:I'll ask you again. Is the term you used - 'petty white scum' - racist or not? I think it obviously is, and so you don't have a leg to stand on in criticizing what anyone else might say, because you only care about racist language as a political tool, not out of principle. If you cared about it in principle, you'd obviously never use it yourself.
0 -
Worldometer gets confused easily.eristdoof said:
Daily Average number of Covid-19 deaths in the last 7 days (8-14th June)FF43 said:
Reason why I selected Log scale was that the absolute numbers now are all down at the X axis because all countries, UK included, are well off the peak. Log scale means that differences between countries now is visually downplayed. The UK comparative situation is actually worse than it might look.Phil said:
Also, the FT charts (as above) are logarithmic plots of the 7-day moving average. If you plot their data on a linear chart, it would be an obviously higher peak & steeper fall - about a factor of 7 from peak to today.MaxPB said:
If that graph was done by date of death the the peak would by higher and the drop would be steeper. Our lack of drop is deaths is a statistical phantom.FF43 said:
Not sure hospitalisation and ICU rates are that useful as point to point comparison. Not all Covid 19 sufferers end up in hospital and not all those that die from it go through ICU. What we can say is that the deaths came down much faster in France compared with the UK.NerysHughes said:
France still has double the number of people in hospital with Covid-19 and double the number in ICU than the UK has.FF43 said:
Agree that's one explanation for why the UK has problems now that France has substantially solved.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
My point was that Scott's tweet is valid. The difference between the UK and other countries is too stark to be dismissed as playing games with statistics.
The UK will now be at or below average deaths for the time of year
The trend isn't our friend as far as the UK's epidemic response is concerned.
(Log charts are good for observing changes in rates of change between widely differing scales, but are not good for comparing absolute quantities by eye.)
Here’s a link to a linear plot of UK deaths/million so far: https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=gbr&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&cumulative=0&logScale=0&perMillion=1&values=deaths
In alphabetical order
Belgium 8
France 36
Germany 13
Italy 63
Spain 0
Sweden 31
UK 165
Source Worldometers0 -
"Watch as I play with words to justify racism against the 'right' people"Dura_Ace said:
Racism = power + prejudice. White people have the power so no pejorative directed at them is racist.BluestBlue said:
You're not good at basic logic, are you? The Nazis were indeed racists, but 'Nazi' is not in itself a racist term, but a technical description of political party.
The terms used by RochdalePioneers, however - 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' - are intrinsically racist in themselves, and thus are not suitable political epithets.
This really isn't hard to understand. But now you've dug yourself into a deep hole of hypocrisy and don't want to admit it, so no doubt you'll keep digging...
1 -
Or the one that deliberately relieved himself on same.tlg86 said:
I assume the lowlife who graffitied Churchill’s plinth didn’t hand themselves in to the police.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man did hand himself into the police early the next day,
surprised that the quick admittance of guilt didn't help his case.0 -
No I didn't see it but I know what you mean. That type of thing can drip drip drip and have an impact, fair or not.Stuartinromford said:
Did you catch Dead Ringers this weekend? A review of life under the virus. There was a sketch at the end about Boris, Dom and Durham, which was uncomfortable listening (and I'm not a fan of B + D). Let's just say that having a chief adviser called Dom was made pretty near the knuckle.kinabalu said:
Pisspoor. Just so so poor. And what a weak weak man. It's a bit pathetic, frankly, and one hates to say this about our PM. I do anyway, I much prefer to respect the person in that position, regardless of party.
Anyway bottom line. I was 'unfavourable trending better' and now I'm HIGHLY UNFAVOURABLE and trending the other way. Christ knows how low he can go. I'd rather not speculate.
Now, you might say that nobody's vote has ever been changed by any satirical production. I think the creators of Private Eye pointed out the huge success of 1930's Berlin cabaret. But sometimes unfair comedic images do stick; Maggie in a man's suit, grey John Major, Blair teasing Prescott for still being a lefty. And if BoJo's satirical image goes from Dulux dog made human to Dom's victim in a No 10 dungeon, that won't help him.
I'm a bit too much of a sensitive flower for it myself. I never really liked Spitting Image, for example.1 -
It would be about 240,000 at Cheltenham over the four days. (I was one of them, incidentally.)Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
Take your point though. Nobody is disputing the 'late lockdown' issue. The two sporting events were still wrong though. And there is of course a big difference between people returning of necessity from holiday and fans voluntarily attending a crowded football stadium.0 -
When you have an incredibly vague and stupid law, you should certainly bitch about the shitty governments that left it there, but you should also bitch about the cretin of a magistrate who chose apply it and turn it up to 11. It's not as if the magistrate had no discretion.RochdalePioneers said:
Perhaps - proposals have been made to reform these old laws which the government have chosen not to enact. The law is the law - he got done.edmundintokyo said:
Crimes should be for what you do not what the Daily Mail thinks about it, there should not be an offence of "outraging public decency".RochdalePioneers said:Pissy man wasn't jailed for having a piss in the street. He was jailed for outraging public decency by pissing up against the type of thing he supposedly was there to defend. Yes he didn't know what it meant or who the memorial was for or probably how to get back to the rat hole he crawled out of. So what - you get that drunk whilst that stupid, there are consequences...
1 -
I see PB has turned very unpleasant today.
Later peeps!
0 -
Mods - there really are some dipshits on this board making the most absurd comments. I "liked seeing these random people almost beaten to death".eadric said:
You are anti white, you liked seeing these random people being beaten almost to death, you didn't condemn it, you loved it, you're just a racist. Own it. Be proud.3 -
Firstly, it probably did help his case - I expect he'd have got a month otherwise.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man did hand himself into the police early the next day, surprised that the quick admittance of guilt didn't help his case.
Secondly, it sounds from the story as if he handed himself in because his father recognised him and told him to 'fess up or he'd shop the lad himself (and I applaud the father for that).2 -
In retrospect the UK had the chance to lock down a week earlier but did not. However most people were critical at the time that Cheltenham went ahead, except for those with tickets.Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.0 -
@Pulpstar - I'd forgotten that Gilmour got 16 months. That was incredibly harsh.
@SouthamObserver and @Scrapheap_as_was - I see the pissy man was one of your own.0 -
BluestBlue said:
I'll ask you again. Is the term you used - 'petty white scum' - racist or not? I think it obviously is, and so you don't have a leg to stand on in criticizing what anyone else might say, because you only care about racist language as a political tool, not out of principle. If you cared about it in principle, you'd obviously never use it yourself.
Of course it isn't racist as several of us have set out to you. Are crayons required so that we can draw you a picture? You are defending petty white racists calling black people dogs. Are all white people petty? No. Do you have to be white to be petty? No. So we can discard the racism accusation. But what they were saying had no qualifiers, it was "blacks". And you are repeatedly defending them.
Amazing. What you said is 100% racist and your denials are laughable. You could easily have condemned the racist language you heard - which would be totally reasonable and which I would agree with - without using racist language about the perpetrators. Whose language, contrary to your repeated lies, I haven't defended once. Feel free to quote an example where I have - you won't find one.
But you felt it wasn't enough to condemn racist language, you also had to use it yourself. Why was that?0 -
Spain are reporting 26 in last seven days but there are acknowledged problems in the reporting which is why I don’t think worldometers is being updated. I take my figures from RTVE.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Worldometer gets confused easily.eristdoof said:
Daily Average number of Covid-19 deaths in the last 7 days (8-14th June)FF43 said:
Reason why I selected Log scale was that the absolute numbers now are all down at the X axis because all countries, UK included, are well off the peak. Log scale means that differences between countries now is visually downplayed. The UK comparative situation is actually worse than it might look.Phil said:
Also, the FT charts (as above) are logarithmic plots of the 7-day moving average. If you plot their data on a linear chart, it would be an obviously higher peak & steeper fall - about a factor of 7 from peak to today.MaxPB said:
If that graph was done by date of death the the peak would by higher and the drop would be steeper. Our lack of drop is deaths is a statistical phantom.FF43 said:
Not sure hospitalisation and ICU rates are that useful as point to point comparison. Not all Covid 19 sufferers end up in hospital and not all those that die from it go through ICU. What we can say is that the deaths came down much faster in France compared with the UK.NerysHughes said:
France still has double the number of people in hospital with Covid-19 and double the number in ICU than the UK has.FF43 said:
Agree that's one explanation for why the UK has problems now that France has substantially solved.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
My point was that Scott's tweet is valid. The difference between the UK and other countries is too stark to be dismissed as playing games with statistics.
The UK will now be at or below average deaths for the time of year
The trend isn't our friend as far as the UK's epidemic response is concerned.
(Log charts are good for observing changes in rates of change between widely differing scales, but are not good for comparing absolute quantities by eye.)
Here’s a link to a linear plot of UK deaths/million so far: https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=gbr&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&cumulative=0&logScale=0&perMillion=1&values=deaths
In alphabetical order
Belgium 8
France 36
Germany 13
Italy 63
Spain 0
Sweden 31
UK 165
Source Worldometers0 -
I'm in broad agreement. "outraging public decency" is an invitation for mob rule. Lets say this chap with the Stella overload had asked to be bumped up to crown court. A jury of his peers deciding what "outraging public decency" means. In febrile times like this its a problem. Hence the proposals for reform ignored so far by the governmentedmundintokyo said:
When you have an incredibly vague and stupid law, you should certainly bitch about the shitty governments that left it there, but you should also bitch about the cretin of a magistrate who chose apply it and turn it up to 11. It's not as if the magistrate had no discretion.RochdalePioneers said:
Perhaps - proposals have been made to reform these old laws which the government have chosen not to enact. The law is the law - he got done.edmundintokyo said:
Crimes should be for what you do not what the Daily Mail thinks about it, there should not be an offence of "outraging public decency".RochdalePioneers said:Pissy man wasn't jailed for having a piss in the street. He was jailed for outraging public decency by pissing up against the type of thing he supposedly was there to defend. Yes he didn't know what it meant or who the memorial was for or probably how to get back to the rat hole he crawled out of. So what - you get that drunk whilst that stupid, there are consequences...
0 -
I raise my hand in sheepish acknowledgement.TOPPING said:
It just shows your lack of judgement earlier on. But no matter, plenty fell under his spell, don't beat yourself up about being one of those. Some are still there. Just be happy you are clearer now, albeit it's a shame it took a highly publicised incident to bring it home to you.kinabalu said:It's sometimes interesting to supplement the anonymous polling data with a drill-down on how the Cummings scandal has impacted the opinion on Boris Johnson of a real person - e.g. me.
It's negatively, I have to say. Never liked or rated Johnson, disappointed our country would choose such a person as our PM, but I was warming to him. I was OK with the tone he struck with his early virus meetings, then he got sick, recovered and I was very impressed with his first video address fresh out of hospital. Moved even. It felt authentic. The first time I had been able to say this about him. So my 'Johnson rating' at this point was 'unfavourable' but trending towards neutral.
The scandal then broke and there was a Header on here which concluded that Cummings ought to go and that he would go. I disagreed on both counts. I thought he probably should stay - given his value to the government - and I never for a moment thought he would resign or be sacked. Armed with my new and improved opinion of Johnson, I assumed he would have the integrity and the political skill and capital to (i) keep his most important SPAD but (ii) make it clear to the public that there had been a reprimand and an unreserved apology.
Well (i) proved to be the case, but as for (ii) how wrong could I be? Instead of reprimand and apology what we got from the PM was praise - PRAISE - for Cummings.
"He acted as he saw fit in the best interests of his family and I will not mark him down for that."
Absolutely incredible. You could have knocked me down with a feather. On recovering composure, I analysed the matter and came to the only possible conclusion. Here you had a guy, the PM of this country, an 80 seat majority won just 7 months ago, who without this "Dom" character would be a lost little lamb. Such was the measure of his vacuity and laziness - the reliance on a SPAD to supply all the intellectual heft and drive at the top of government because he had none of either. A dependency so craven that not only could he not bring himself to criticize the rule breaking and rank hypocrisy of Cummings, he ended up praising it.
Pisspoor. Just so so poor. And what a weak weak man. It's a bit pathetic, frankly, and one hates to say this about our PM. I do anyway, I much prefer to respect the person in that position, regardless of party.
Anyway bottom line. I was 'unfavourable trending better' and now I'm HIGHLY UNFAVOURABLE and trending the other way. Christ knows how low he can go. I'd rather not speculate.
Better one sinner, etc
I'd even started to call him Boris.
Back to Johnson now - if he's lucky.0 -
And Spain, and Italy.Peter_the_Punter said:
Much softer than France, I believe.kamski said:
UK's lockdown was certainly not far softer than Germany's. A bit harder (and quite a bit longer) so far as I can tell. No doubt there are other European countries that also had softer lockdowns.MattW said:
I'm not sure that that is relevant.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
Was the *effect* any different. I don't recall significant differences in fall in transport usage, for example.
There was a comparative graph from Google data on Twitter somewhere, and I can't find it.
Knowing what we know now (and usual disclaimer, I'm a physicist who teaches GCSE science, so I know a bit of biology but not much...) it looks like:
1 You don't need particularly harsh measures to keep Covid-19 numbers constant. Stop the most extreme spreading events, wear masks, wash hands and have working testing and tracing. Germany got lucky, did enough early on that their numbers never got very big. Sweden is sort of doing the same, but with a higher baseline.
2 If you miss that early opportunity, your choices are more limited. Lockdowns work to reduce the rate of infection (it would be pretty weird if they didn't). The harder the lockdown, the faster the fall; compare China, Spain, UK, Sweden.
3 So if you are a government and you miss the bus on step 1, you have two Solomonesque judgments to make. First is do you go for a harsher, shorter lockdown or a softer, longer one? Most of Europe went for the first, the UK seems to have gone for the second- perhaps not realising that softer = longer. Second, when do you try to transition back to "we can control this with softer measures?" The temptation will be for the UK to relax controls when there is more virus about than in other countries. There are economic and social arguments for that, but it's a gamble.3 -
The most damaging was David steel in David Owens pocket.kinabalu said:
No I didn't see it but I know what you mean. That type of thing can drip drip drip and have an impact, fair or not.Stuartinromford said:
Did you catch Dead Ringers this weekend? A review of life under the virus. There was a sketch at the end about Boris, Dom and Durham, which was uncomfortable listening (and I'm not a fan of B + D). Let's just say that having a chief adviser called Dom was made pretty near the knuckle.kinabalu said:
Pisspoor. Just so so poor. And what a weak weak man. It's a bit pathetic, frankly, and one hates to say this about our PM. I do anyway, I much prefer to respect the person in that position, regardless of party.
Anyway bottom line. I was 'unfavourable trending better' and now I'm HIGHLY UNFAVOURABLE and trending the other way. Christ knows how low he can go. I'd rather not speculate.
Now, you might say that nobody's vote has ever been changed by any satirical production. I think the creators of Private Eye pointed out the huge success of 1930's Berlin cabaret. But sometimes unfair comedic images do stick; Maggie in a man's suit, grey John Major, Blair teasing Prescott for still being a lefty. And if BoJo's satirical image goes from Dulux dog made human to Dom's victim in a No 10 dungeon, that won't help him.
I'm a bit too much of a sensitive flower for it myself. I never really liked Spitting Image, for example.1 -
Please tell me how "petty" and "scum" are racist termsBluestBlue said:
Amazing. What you said is 100% racist and your denials are laughable. You could easily have condemned the racist language you heard - which would be totally reasonable and which I would agree with - without using racist language about the perpetrators. Whose language, contrary to your repeated lies, I haven't defended once. Feel free to quote an example where I have - you won't find one.RochdalePioneers said:BluestBlue said:I'll ask you again. Is the term you used - 'petty white scum' - racist or not? I think it obviously is, and so you don't have a leg to stand on in criticizing what anyone else might say, because you only care about racist language as a political tool, not out of principle. If you cared about it in principle, you'd obviously never use it yourself.
Of course it isn't racist as several of us have set out to you. Are crayons required so that we can draw you a picture? You are defending petty white racists calling black people dogs. Are all white people petty? No. Do you have to be white to be petty? No. So we can discard the racism accusation. But what they were saying had no qualifiers, it was "blacks". And you are repeatedly defending them.
But you felt it wasn't enough to condemn racist language, you also had to use it yourself. Why was that?0 -
Can I see your figures then?TheWhiteRabbit said:
Worldometer gets confused easily.eristdoof said:
Daily Average number of Covid-19 deaths in the last 7 days (8-14th June)FF43 said:
Reason why I selected Log scale was that the absolute numbers now are all down at the X axis because all countries, UK included, are well off the peak. Log scale means that differences between countries now is visually downplayed. The UK comparative situation is actually worse than it might look.Phil said:
Also, the FT charts (as above) are logarithmic plots of the 7-day moving average. If you plot their data on a linear chart, it would be an obviously higher peak & steeper fall - about a factor of 7 from peak to today.MaxPB said:
If that graph was done by date of death the the peak would by higher and the drop would be steeper. Our lack of drop is deaths is a statistical phantom.FF43 said:
Not sure hospitalisation and ICU rates are that useful as point to point comparison. Not all Covid 19 sufferers end up in hospital and not all those that die from it go through ICU. What we can say is that the deaths came down much faster in France compared with the UK.NerysHughes said:
France still has double the number of people in hospital with Covid-19 and double the number in ICU than the UK has.FF43 said:
Agree that's one explanation for why the UK has problems now that France has substantially solved.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
My point was that Scott's tweet is valid. The difference between the UK and other countries is too stark to be dismissed as playing games with statistics.
The UK will now be at or below average deaths for the time of year
The trend isn't our friend as far as the UK's epidemic response is concerned.
(Log charts are good for observing changes in rates of change between widely differing scales, but are not good for comparing absolute quantities by eye.)
Here’s a link to a linear plot of UK deaths/million so far: https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=gbr&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&cumulative=0&logScale=0&perMillion=1&values=deaths
In alphabetical order
Belgium 8
France 36
Germany 13
Italy 63
Spain 0
Sweden 31
UK 165
Source Worldometers0 -
Please cool it or else the bans will start
5 -
Be interesting to see how that breaks down by ethnicity:
https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1272491297039888385?s=200 -
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
0 -
I think all anyone asks for is consistency here. How long has the person who attempted to set fire to the Cenotaph flag received, anyone know ?Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
The police were literally there when it happened so it's not like a burglary where it might be difficult to find the suspect.0 -
I seemed to remember in Gilmour case, he had spent the whole day rioting, causing mayhem, caught on camera smashing stuff up and setting fires. It was more that just that one act.tlg86 said:@Pulpstar - I'd forgotten that Gilmour got 16 months. That was incredibly harsh.
@SouthamObserver and @Scrapheap_as_was - I see the pissy man was one of your own.0 -
Eadric - you need to withdraw your comment that I "liked seeing these random people almost beaten to death". You can copy BluestBlue in taking offence at my use of the apparently racist words "petty" and "scum" if you like - he is just amusing. You sir are not.0
-
Millions of Liverpool fans wish that match had never happened....Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
1 -
When you attach them to a term denoting an inherent racial characteristic, in this case 'white'.RochdalePioneers said:
Please tell me how "petty" and "scum" are racist termsBluestBlue said:
Amazing. What you said is 100% racist and your denials are laughable. You could easily have condemned the racist language you heard - which would be totally reasonable and which I would agree with - without using racist language about the perpetrators. Whose language, contrary to your repeated lies, I haven't defended once. Feel free to quote an example where I have - you won't find one.RochdalePioneers said:BluestBlue said:I'll ask you again. Is the term you used - 'petty white scum' - racist or not? I think it obviously is, and so you don't have a leg to stand on in criticizing what anyone else might say, because you only care about racist language as a political tool, not out of principle. If you cared about it in principle, you'd obviously never use it yourself.
Of course it isn't racist as several of us have set out to you. Are crayons required so that we can draw you a picture? You are defending petty white racists calling black people dogs. Are all white people petty? No. Do you have to be white to be petty? No. So we can discard the racism accusation. But what they were saying had no qualifiers, it was "blacks". And you are repeatedly defending them.
But you felt it wasn't enough to condemn racist language, you also had to use it yourself. Why was that?
This is textbook stuff - I have no idea why you're still digging. I think we can all agree that what the people you overheard saying was wrong. You might even wish to call them 'scum' for doing so. But injecting racism into your complaint about racism is so self-defeating as to be absurd.0 -
Hence the sentence, 16 months is longer than a fortnight. How long has the flag lighter received though.FrancisUrquhart said:
I seemed to remember in Gilmour case, he had spent the whole day causing mayham, smashing stuff up and setting fires. It was more that just that one act.tlg86 said:@Pulpstar - I'd forgotten that Gilmour got 16 months. That was incredibly harsh.
@SouthamObserver and @Scrapheap_as_was - I see the pissy man was one of your own.0 -
That's the other thing, how can you miss an opportunity like this to give a perfect "punishment fits the crime" community service order? Is there nothing in Great Britain that needs cleaning because it smells of piss?Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
3 -
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
3 -
Which is the problem with the "outraging public decency" law. It lacks definitiontlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
0 -
What is really interesting is that although we may have locked down too late, it was actually a couple of weeks earlier than the scientific advisors were advising.eristdoof said:
In retrospect the UK had the chance to lock down a week earlier but did not. However most people were critical at the time that Cheltenham went ahead, except for those with tickets.Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
I am really not sure where that leaves us in terms of criticism on this specific issue.0 -
Even Paula Radcliffe can't escape becoming an object of the culture war.
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/12724893709945856003 -
Basic question. Just where are people meant to take a piss (Even on a peaceful protest)tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
?!
Normally it'd be the pubs but those are closed by fiat.0 -
Yeah, it was clearly not intentional. The furore around the whole incident is ridiculous.tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
1 -
Ah right, and there was this:FrancisUrquhart said:
I seemed to remember in Gilmour case, he had spent the whole day rioting, causing mayhem, caught on camera smashing stuff up and setting fires. It was more that just that one act.tlg86 said:@Pulpstar - I'd forgotten that Gilmour got 16 months. That was incredibly harsh.
@SouthamObserver and @Scrapheap_as_was - I see the pissy man was one of your own.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/aug/06/david-gilmour-ive-been-bonded-to-charlie-since-he-was-three-we-were-incensed-by-the-injustice
Part of his defence was that he was off his head on drugs, dealing with being rejected by his biological father. At 21, and still at Cambridge University, he was one of the youngest inmates.
I'm not sure that's a great line of defence to be honest!0 -
If you don't like what a private company is doing you can boycott them.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions0 -
Maybe Germany's lucky break was that around the height of the Italian Meltdown a town near Aachen had a very significant outbreak. This meant that most people took the clear advice of the government very seriously. The extent of the lockdown here was slightly less than in the UK. For example partners who lived in different households were allowed to "see" each other, where as some in the UK lost their jobs because of that.Stuartinromford said:
And Spain, and Italy.Peter_the_Punter said:
Much softer than France, I believe.kamski said:
UK's lockdown was certainly not far softer than Germany's. A bit harder (and quite a bit longer) so far as I can tell. No doubt there are other European countries that also had softer lockdowns.MattW said:
I'm not sure that that is relevant.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
Was the *effect* any different. I don't recall significant differences in fall in transport usage, for example.
There was a comparative graph from Google data on Twitter somewhere, and I can't find it.
Knowing what we know now (and usual disclaimer, I'm a physicist who teaches GCSE science, so I know a bit of biology but not much...) it looks like:
1 You don't need particularly harsh measures to keep Covid-19 numbers constant. Stop the most extreme spreading events, wear masks, wash hands and have working testing and tracing. Germany got lucky, did enough early on that their numbers never got very big. Sweden is sort of doing the same, but with a higher baseline.
2 If you miss that early opportunity, your choices are more limited. Lockdowns work to reduce the rate of infection (it would be pretty weird if they didn't). The harder the lockdown, the faster the fall; compare China, Spain, UK, Sweden.
3 So if you are a government and you miss the bus on step 1, you have two Solomonesque judgments to make. First is do you go for a harsher, shorter lockdown or a softer, longer one? Most of Europe went for the first, the UK seems to have gone for the second- perhaps not realising that softer = longer. Second, when do you try to transition back to "we can control this with softer measures?" The temptation will be for the UK to relax controls when there is more virus about than in other countries. There are economic and social arguments for that, but it's a gamble.0 -
Well they were not supposed to be there so there was no need to provide toiletsPulpstar said:
Basic question. Just where are people meant to take a piss (Even on a peaceful protest)tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
?!
Normally it'd be the pubs but those are closed by fiat.0 -
Science isn't always exact. Odd that when criticism was being proffered of the government's actions they always hid behind the "we followed the science" defence and have now switched to "scientists advise we make decisions" justifications for going against the science / their previously announced rules.Richard_Tyndall said:
What is really interesting is that although we may have locked down too late, it was actually a couple of weeks earlier than the scientific advisors were advising.eristdoof said:
In retrospect the UK had the chance to lock down a week earlier but did not. However most people were critical at the time that Cheltenham went ahead, except for those with tickets.Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
I am really not sure where that leaves us in terms of criticism on this specific issue.1 -
It's due to the contradiction created by the fact that SAGE thought CV-19 would be overwhelmingly bad and therefore recommended fewer, rather than more, measures which they considered to be of only limited effect.Richard_Tyndall said:
What is really interesting is that although we may have locked down too late, it was actually a couple of weeks earlier than the scientific advisors were advising.eristdoof said:
In retrospect the UK had the chance to lock down a week earlier but did not. However most people were critical at the time that Cheltenham went ahead, except for those with tickets.Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
I am really not sure where that leaves us in terms of criticism on this specific issue.0 -
I'd take a guess that most others involved in various types of altercations are yet to have their day in court. This guy turned up himself at a police station and pled guilty straight away. Many others are probably still being identified from CCTV and will take a while to get through the system.Pulpstar said:
I think all anyone asks for is consistency here. How long has the person who attempted to set fire to the Cenotaph flag received, anyone know ?Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
The police were literally there when it happened so it's not like a burglary where it might be difficult to find the suspect.
What it will almost certainly do though, is for this man to end up as a martyr and rallying point for many of the unsavoury right-wing types, who see that after two weeks of violence the only guy apparently in prison is someone who was caught taking a piss.1 -
Yeah it's not as if he went and found Mandela's monument and pissed on it and posted it to Facebook.RobD said:
Yeah, it was clearly not intentional. The furore around the whole incident is ridiculous.tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
0 -
Toilet facilities are neither provided when the police have to kettle large crowds of protestors. You're right that they weren't supposed to be there but I don't think that practically speaking it would have made a difference.nichomar said:
Well they were not supposed to be there so there was no need to provide toiletsPulpstar said:
Basic question. Just where are people meant to take a piss (Even on a peaceful protest)tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
?!
Normally it'd be the pubs but those are closed by fiat.0 -
Well yes, but this goes for both 'sides'.nichomar said:
Well they were not supposed to be there so there was no need to provide toiletsPulpstar said:
Basic question. Just where are people meant to take a piss (Even on a peaceful protest)tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
?!
Normally it'd be the pubs but those are closed by fiat.1 -
No, I'm not sure either, Richard.Richard_Tyndall said:
What is really interesting is that although we may have locked down too late, it was actually a couple of weeks earlier than the scientific advisors were advising.eristdoof said:
In retrospect the UK had the chance to lock down a week earlier but did not. However most people were critical at the time that Cheltenham went ahead, except for those with tickets.Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
I am really not sure where that leaves us in terms of criticism on this specific issue.
For the record, I went because the Government view at the time was that it would be ok and there was no obvious reason to dispute it. Also, I knew the weather forecast was good so I would be spending most of my time outdoors.
It's only in retrospect that I can see the decision was wrong but who knew what and when and why decisions were made is complex and unclear.1 -
Left-wing demonstrators can go days without relieving themselves. Everyone knows this.Pulpstar said:
Well yes, but this goes for both 'sides'.nichomar said:
Well they were not supposed to be there so there was no need to provide toiletsPulpstar said:
Basic question. Just where are people meant to take a piss (Even on a peaceful protest)tlg86 said:
My problem with it is that if he had intentionally pissed on the memorial, then I'd say a couple of months in prison would be fair. But I'm almost certain that he was doing nothing other than having a piss in the street, which is illegal, but I don't think warrants 14 days in prison.Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
?!
Normally it'd be the pubs but those are closed by fiat.0 -
You feel you made a hasty decision in delurking?Fitz said:What a strange site
2 -
If the gent got two weeks for a Jimmy Riddle without malicious intent (to give him the benefit of the very real doubt) then I hate to think what the other sentences will be.Sandpit said:
I'd take a guess that most others involved in various types of altercations are yet to have their day in court. This guy turned up himself at a police station and pled guilty straight away. Many others are probably still being identified from CCTV and will take a while to get through the system.Pulpstar said:
I think all anyone asks for is consistency here. How long has the person who attempted to set fire to the Cenotaph flag received, anyone know ?Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
The police were literally there when it happened so it's not like a burglary where it might be difficult to find the suspect.
What it will almost certainly do though, is for this man to end up as a martyr and rallying point for many of the unsavoury right-wing types, who see that after two weeks of violence the only guy apparently in prison is someone who was caught taking a piss.1 -
The lockdown in the UK was too lax in that it still let people wander the streets did nothing to mandate face coverings, especially on public transport. No control of the use of private cars etc I can’t understand why when they could see what was happening is Italy and Spain they didn’t immediately lockdown.Richard_Tyndall said:
What is really interesting is that although we may have locked down too late, it was actually a couple of weeks earlier than the scientific advisors were advising.eristdoof said:
In retrospect the UK had the chance to lock down a week earlier but did not. However most people were critical at the time that Cheltenham went ahead, except for those with tickets.Flatlander said:
3,000 or so supporters came over from Madrid for a single day.Peter_the_Punter said:
Quite a few decisions are looking a bit rough in retrospect. The Cheltenham Festival appears to have been a istake and as for Liverpool v A Madrid......FrancisUrquhart said:
Iran's decision to open the mosques like normal was incredible decision.LostPassword said:A Ramadan wave of infections and death from the Covid is now evident in many countries: Iran, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bangladesh, Iraq.
Meanwhile, 200,000 people were returning from a holiday in Spain every day for about a fortnight.
60,000 were at Cheltenham
Meanwhile 5,000,000 people were using the tube.
It was the late lockdown that was the problem, not specific events that were allowed before it was brought in.
I am really not sure where that leaves us in terms of criticism on this specific issue.
1 -
That wouldn't satisfy me if I thought YouTube were deleting politically-unpopular comments, because they might be doing it for fear of regulatory action; There's a nasty chilling effect where if a company *thinks* the government will pass laws that hurt them if they do something that displeases it, they go ahead and stop the displeasing thing, without the government ever needing to pass the law.Alistair said:
If you don't like what a private company is doing you can boycott them.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
This is worse than actually passing the law because there's much less accountability; Parliament never debates the "censor the internet" law and you can't organize against it - because it doesn't actually exist - but despite its non-existence, the law is just as effective as if it had been passed.
Going to a rival platform probably won't help in this situation because if that platform becomes popular enough to get a network effect, it'll be subject to the exact same pressures.4 -
Rebecca Long-Bailey is very quickly making herself entirely irrelevant. Her shadowing of abysmal Gavin Williamson has been pitiful. I suspect she will be reshuffled as soon as it is decent to do it.LostPassword said:
I expect Starmer to accept the conclusions of the report. I also expect many of the twitter Corbynite diehards to dispute it.Philip_Thompson said:
That he kept Rebecca Long-Bailey in his Cabinet was a worrying start.Sandpit said:
When is the EHRC report on antisemitism due to be published?SirNorfolkPassmore said:OGH says, "What I find remarkable is how little the leader rating change is reflected in the voting figures."
I agree and wonder how far that reflects the deep damage Corbyn did to the Labour brand. In other words, are people saying they are impressed by Starmer but worry that his party will hobble or even ditch him if they get into office?
What it speaks to is Starmer's urgent need for a "Militant moment" - a very visible event that says, "This is MY party now". I've little doubt that Starmer's team are working on how to engineer that, whether through the antisemitism work, the postponed conference (if it ever happens) or otherwise. But I think there's a danger, if they can't make it happen in the next six months, it won't happen at all.
If that report says what most of us expect it to, that’s going to be Starmer’s one chance to expel the New Militant.
What does RLB do? If she backs her current leader, that's a win for Starmer. If she joins the diehards and he sacks her, that's a win for Starmer.
Anything else and he loses.
0 -
There was an element of luck about the German decision but like good punters everywhere, they made the most of it.eristdoof said:
Maybe Germany's lucky break was that around the height of the Italian Meltdown a town near Aachen had a very significant outbreak. This meant that most people took the clear advice of the government very seriously. The extent of the lockdown here was slightly less than in the UK. For example partners who lived in different households were allowed to "see" each other, where as some in the UK lost their jobs because of that.Stuartinromford said:
And Spain, and Italy.Peter_the_Punter said:
Much softer than France, I believe.kamski said:
UK's lockdown was certainly not far softer than Germany's. A bit harder (and quite a bit longer) so far as I can tell. No doubt there are other European countries that also had softer lockdowns.MattW said:
I'm not sure that that is relevant.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
Was the *effect* any different. I don't recall significant differences in fall in transport usage, for example.
There was a comparative graph from Google data on Twitter somewhere, and I can't find it.
Knowing what we know now (and usual disclaimer, I'm a physicist who teaches GCSE science, so I know a bit of biology but not much...) it looks like:
1 You don't need particularly harsh measures to keep Covid-19 numbers constant. Stop the most extreme spreading events, wear masks, wash hands and have working testing and tracing. Germany got lucky, did enough early on that their numbers never got very big. Sweden is sort of doing the same, but with a higher baseline.
2 If you miss that early opportunity, your choices are more limited. Lockdowns work to reduce the rate of infection (it would be pretty weird if they didn't). The harder the lockdown, the faster the fall; compare China, Spain, UK, Sweden.
3 So if you are a government and you miss the bus on step 1, you have two Solomonesque judgments to make. First is do you go for a harsher, shorter lockdown or a softer, longer one? Most of Europe went for the first, the UK seems to have gone for the second- perhaps not realising that softer = longer. Second, when do you try to transition back to "we can control this with softer measures?" The temptation will be for the UK to relax controls when there is more virus about than in other countries. There are economic and social arguments for that, but it's a gamble.1 -
Draining the swamp.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions0 -
Where are the moths today? We need something natural and calming to contemplate.0
-
Youtube got caught a couple of weeks ago, auto-deleting certain phrases the Chinese didn't like, relating to Tibet and Tiananmen.edmundintokyo said:
That wouldn't satisfy me if I thought YouTube were deleting politically-unpopular comments, because they might be doing it for fear of regulatory action; There's a nasty chilling effect where if a company *thinks* the government will pass laws that hurt them if they do something that displeases it, they go ahead and stop the displeasing thing, without the government ever needing to pass the law.Alistair said:
If you don't like what a private company is doing you can boycott them.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
This is worse than actually passing the law because there's much less accountability; Parliament never debates the "censor the internet" law and you can't organize against it - because it doesn't actually exist - but despite its non-existence, the law is just as effective as if it had been passed.
Going to a rival platform probably won't help in this situation because if that platform becomes popular enough to get a network effect, it'll be subject to the exact same pressures.
https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/05/26/1738201/youtube-is-deleting-comments-with-two-phrases-that-insult-chinas-communist-party
It's very worrying behaviour, and fuels the narrative that social media companies are taking sides in the culture war.1 -
They are the one's making the decisions on their own David, no consultations, just their way or the highway. Just exposes how shackled we are and have to beg them for everything , pathetic.DavidL said:
Around 2m are going to see it within weeks as their jobs disappear. And proportionally more will be in Scotland since we are dragging our feet. No doubt that will be Westminster's fault too though.eek said:
Most people will only see the issue when the magic money tree cheque disappears.DavidL said:
I genuinely find the perception that Cummings' idiocy, as opposed to a borrowing requirement of £60bn in a single month was the driving force behind this profoundly delusional. It seriously makes me worry that far too many people in this country have no clue at all how serious our position is and what the implications for our future are.Mexicanpete said:
I can understand the need to unlock the economy to mitigate economic damage. It just appears to all but the most enthusiastic Conservatives that this process was accelerated, and without due thought, to mitigate against the negative press the Cummings story was generating. It may be wholly coincidental, but it doesn't look like it.DavidL said:
Firstly, I do not think that Cummings did hijack the Covid agenda. The driving force for coming out of lockdown is economics, not Cummings. Secondly, whether the economy recovers quickly will decide Boris's fate and his legacy. The lack of perspective on the significance or otherwise of a special advisor which dominated our press and media for 10 days is still to fully dissipate, it appears.Mexicanpete said:
Whether in the longer term it will be seen to be politically disastrous remains to be seen. Whichever way you look at it, Johnson's Covid agenda was hijacked by the Cummings escapade. That may be a bigger legacy issue for Johnson than if he survives as PM for the life of the Parliament.DavidL said:Boris undoubtedly took a hit for keeping Cummings. He presumably concluded it was worth it. Too early to say if that was the right call or not.
0 -
You know the owners of these gigantic media companies are billionaires, and perhaps due to become trillionaires in the not-too-distant future?kinabalu said:
Draining the swamp.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
What happens if a popular movement for the redistribution of wealth rises up and gets itself completely censored by said media billionaires? Because you can sure they'll justify it as 'draining the swamp' too...1 -
Weirdly all boxsets of Little Britain are now unavailable on Amazon.
They might have all sold out, or they might have been pulled.
This doesn’t appear to be the case for Bo Selecta or League of Gentlemen though.0 -
That is not so odd for the web is it?Fitz said:You all seem very excitable
That outrage drives out reason on the web in general is an observation of long-standing. It's one of the things that is normal about this place.0 -
Yes. That was crass. It was driven by a stereotypical view of 'tall dark and handsome' men being alphas. Which is of course bollox. And I should know.nichomar said:
The most damaging was David steel in David Owens pocket.kinabalu said:
No I didn't see it but I know what you mean. That type of thing can drip drip drip and have an impact, fair or not.Stuartinromford said:
Did you catch Dead Ringers this weekend? A review of life under the virus. There was a sketch at the end about Boris, Dom and Durham, which was uncomfortable listening (and I'm not a fan of B + D). Let's just say that having a chief adviser called Dom was made pretty near the knuckle.kinabalu said:
Pisspoor. Just so so poor. And what a weak weak man. It's a bit pathetic, frankly, and one hates to say this about our PM. I do anyway, I much prefer to respect the person in that position, regardless of party.
Anyway bottom line. I was 'unfavourable trending better' and now I'm HIGHLY UNFAVOURABLE and trending the other way. Christ knows how low he can go. I'd rather not speculate.
Now, you might say that nobody's vote has ever been changed by any satirical production. I think the creators of Private Eye pointed out the huge success of 1930's Berlin cabaret. But sometimes unfair comedic images do stick; Maggie in a man's suit, grey John Major, Blair teasing Prescott for still being a lefty. And if BoJo's satirical image goes from Dulux dog made human to Dom's victim in a No 10 dungeon, that won't help him.
I'm a bit too much of a sensitive flower for it myself. I never really liked Spitting Image, for example.0 -
Except policy in this area is a competence of the Scottish government.malcolmg said:
They are the one's making the decisions on their own David, no consultations, just their way or the highway. Just exposes how shackled we are and have to beg them for everything , pathetic.DavidL said:
Around 2m are going to see it within weeks as their jobs disappear. And proportionally more will be in Scotland since we are dragging our feet. No doubt that will be Westminster's fault too though.eek said:
Most people will only see the issue when the magic money tree cheque disappears.DavidL said:
I genuinely find the perception that Cummings' idiocy, as opposed to a borrowing requirement of £60bn in a single month was the driving force behind this profoundly delusional. It seriously makes me worry that far too many people in this country have no clue at all how serious our position is and what the implications for our future are.Mexicanpete said:
I can understand the need to unlock the economy to mitigate economic damage. It just appears to all but the most enthusiastic Conservatives that this process was accelerated, and without due thought, to mitigate against the negative press the Cummings story was generating. It may be wholly coincidental, but it doesn't look like it.DavidL said:
Firstly, I do not think that Cummings did hijack the Covid agenda. The driving force for coming out of lockdown is economics, not Cummings. Secondly, whether the economy recovers quickly will decide Boris's fate and his legacy. The lack of perspective on the significance or otherwise of a special advisor which dominated our press and media for 10 days is still to fully dissipate, it appears.Mexicanpete said:
Whether in the longer term it will be seen to be politically disastrous remains to be seen. Whichever way you look at it, Johnson's Covid agenda was hijacked by the Cummings escapade. That may be a bigger legacy issue for Johnson than if he survives as PM for the life of the Parliament.DavidL said:Boris undoubtedly took a hit for keeping Cummings. He presumably concluded it was worth it. Too early to say if that was the right call or not.
0 -
Sold out I think.Casino_Royale said:Weirdly all boxsets of Little Britain are now unavailable on Amazon.
They might have all sold out, or they might have been pulled.
This doesn’t appear to be the case for Bo Selecta or League of Gentlemen though.0 -
Where I am in NRW (the most populous state), the ban on meeting more than one person from a different household only ever applied to public spaces. You were specifically allowed to invite as many people to your own home as you liked (although the advice was to avoid inviting lots). Other states had different rules.eristdoof said:
Maybe Germany's lucky break was that around the height of the Italian Meltdown a town near Aachen had a very significant outbreak. This meant that most people took the clear advice of the government very seriously. The extent of the lockdown here was slightly less than in the UK. For example partners who lived in different households were allowed to "see" each other, where as some in the UK lost their jobs because of that.Stuartinromford said:
And Spain, and Italy.Peter_the_Punter said:
Much softer than France, I believe.kamski said:
UK's lockdown was certainly not far softer than Germany's. A bit harder (and quite a bit longer) so far as I can tell. No doubt there are other European countries that also had softer lockdowns.MattW said:
I'm not sure that that is relevant.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
Was the *effect* any different. I don't recall significant differences in fall in transport usage, for example.
There was a comparative graph from Google data on Twitter somewhere, and I can't find it.
Knowing what we know now (and usual disclaimer, I'm a physicist who teaches GCSE science, so I know a bit of biology but not much...) it looks like:
1 You don't need particularly harsh measures to keep Covid-19 numbers constant. Stop the most extreme spreading events, wear masks, wash hands and have working testing and tracing. Germany got lucky, did enough early on that their numbers never got very big. Sweden is sort of doing the same, but with a higher baseline.
2 If you miss that early opportunity, your choices are more limited. Lockdowns work to reduce the rate of infection (it would be pretty weird if they didn't). The harder the lockdown, the faster the fall; compare China, Spain, UK, Sweden.
3 So if you are a government and you miss the bus on step 1, you have two Solomonesque judgments to make. First is do you go for a harsher, shorter lockdown or a softer, longer one? Most of Europe went for the first, the UK seems to have gone for the second- perhaps not realising that softer = longer. Second, when do you try to transition back to "we can control this with softer measures?" The temptation will be for the UK to relax controls when there is more virus about than in other countries. There are economic and social arguments for that, but it's a gamble.
I think part of the luck was that because there was, relatively, a lot of testing early on people knew about the outbreaks, and the outbreaks were kept a bit under control. But it did seem to me that most people were not taking it that seriously until the second week of March when Merkel finally broke her silence - then people suddenly started taking it seriously.0 -
Weirdly, despite very mysterious comment moderation and demonetizing the accounts of people who dress too sexily while reviewing 3D printing equipment and pulse oximetry gadgets, YouTube will still autoplay straight-up racist propaganda videos after ordinary stuff about civil rights.kinabalu said:
Draining the swamp.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
YouTube's recommendation algorithm *is* the swamp.4 -
As performance art goes I think your four-part act lacks a little something.Fitz said:I'm going now, I don't like it here
Bye3 -
What a clownHYUFD said:
Nats are too busy fighting about trans rights with each other now to bother with BruceCarnyx said:
The other interesting point about Scotland and statues is how little reaction there has been to the vandalism of Bruce at Bannockburn - if we Scots were as obsessed with the past as the Tories and their fellow travellers down south [edit]* are (remember how they kept going on and on about Bannockburn in 2014) we'd be rioting too. But it's in fact: meh, some poor sod of a NTS stone conservator has to go out with the cleaning kit, glad it's not me ....Theuniondivvie said:
The 'gathering' of Loyalists in Glasgow yesterday and Saturday pretty much encapsulates this. Yesterday having once more found that nobody was actually attacking their precious monuments, the beered-up twats started in on the police, passers by and another faction of football supporters looking for a ruck. These guys are just gagging for an enemy within.SouthamObserver said:
What he said - completely accurately - is that Labour is not talking about it, neither are the LibDems, the Greens or the SNP. The only party talking about it are the Tories. It's classic Cummings. His entire modus operando is about the creation of division. Given the mess the government is making of just about everything it goes near you can see why he is doing it. I just wonder whether it is sustainable for four years.DavidL said:
If that's what Lammy was saying he was being dishonest. The BLM/twitter mobs lifted the attack on statues and symbols of past oppression from a background noise to front page news. I am cynical enough to acknowledge that the government response has been, "bring it on" for electoral reasons. Having a Corbynite foe of course makes life easy. SKS has been right not to play but Lammy is being disingenuous at best.SouthamObserver said:
The Tories have to keep their electoral coalition together. That will depend on ensuring continuing division along Brexit lines. No-one does disunity better than Dominic Cummings. The flaw in the plan may be that the opposition is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. As David Lammy observed this morning, the only people talking about statues being removed right now are the Tories. Can you fight a perpetual culture war against a non-existent foe?DavidL said:Boris undoubtedly took a hit for keeping Cummings. He presumably concluded it was worth it. Too early to say if that was the right call or not.
*Edit: some of the strongest reactions I saw on Twitter to the Bruce news (and not in support of the vandalism) were actually from staunch unionists.
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1272220455974428675?s=19
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1272220464480387072?s=190 -
Racism is discriminating against somebody based on their race.Dura_Ace said:
Racism = power + prejudice. White people have the power so no pejorative directed at them is racist.BluestBlue said:
You're not good at basic logic, are you? The Nazis were indeed racists, but 'Nazi' is not in itself a racist term, but a technical description of political party.
The terms used by RochdalePioneers, however - 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' - are intrinsically racist in themselves, and thus are not suitable political epithets.
This really isn't hard to understand. But now you've dug yourself into a deep hole of hypocrisy and don't want to admit it, so no doubt you'll keep digging...
End of.4 -
Better luck in 2050Fitz said:I'm going now, I don't like it here
Bye
3 -
Tories really hate that the SNP are as successful whilst they are a bunch of duds.MattW said:
You'll note I didn't say "Scottish".Theuniondivvie said:
Never stand in the way of a PB Scotch expert explaining Scotland and the SNP to us. It's most enlightening..Carnyx said:
There's a difference between securing national freedom and hating the English. A great many of the delegates there WERE English. Thet wouldn't be there if they didn't know the difference.MattW said:
Forgive me a wry smile.Carnyx said:
The other interesting point about Scotland and statues is how little reaction there has been to the vandalism of Bruce at Bannockburn - if we Scots were as obsessed with the past as the Tories and their fellow travellers down south [edit]* are (remember how they kept going on and on about Bannockburn in 2014) we'd be rioting too. But it's in fact: meh, some poor sod of a NTS stone conservator has to go out with the cleaning kit, glad it's not me ....Theuniondivvie said:
The 'gathering' of Loyalists in Glasgow yesterday and Saturday pretty much encapsulates this. Yesterday having once more found that nobody was actually attacking their precious monuments, the beered-up twats started in on the police, passers by and another faction of football supporters looking for a ruck. These guys are just gagging for an enemy within.SouthamObserver said:
What he said - completely accurately - is that Labour is not talking about it, neither are the LibDems, the Greens or the SNP. The only party talking about it are the Tories. It's classic Cummings. His entire modus operando is about the creation of division. Given the mess the government is making of just about everything it goes near you can see why he is doing it. I just wonder whether it is sustainable for four years.DavidL said:
If that's what Lammy was saying he was being dishonest. The BLM/twitter mobs lifted the attack on statues and symbols of past oppression from a background noise to front page news. I am cynical enough to acknowledge that the government response has been, "bring it on" for electoral reasons. Having a Corbynite foe of course makes life easy. SKS has been right not to play but Lammy is being disingenuous at best.SouthamObserver said:
The Tories have to keep their electoral coalition together. That will depend on ensuring continuing division along Brexit lines. No-one does disunity better than Dominic Cummings. The flaw in the plan may be that the opposition is no longer led by Jeremy Corbyn. As David Lammy observed this morning, the only people talking about statues being removed right now are the Tories. Can you fight a perpetual culture war against a non-existent foe?DavidL said:Boris undoubtedly took a hit for keeping Cummings. He presumably concluded it was worth it. Too early to say if that was the right call or not.
*Edit: some of the strongest reactions I saw on Twitter to the Bruce news (and not in support of the vandalism) were actually from staunch unionists.
Do the SNP not close their every annual conference re-brainwashing themselves as to how much they hate the English because of something that happened in 1314 or thereabouts?
"Scots, who have with Wallace bled,
Scots, whom Bruce has often led,
Welcome to your gory bed
Or to victory."
The only political establishment more obsessed with historical victimhood I can think of are probably the Serbs.
I'll refrain from posting the video. No I won't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gnEBv4Mbmo
I think the SNP handling of itself over a number of decades is quitet clear enough.0 -
Like Doctor Who I’m just wondering who the Cornish time lord will come back as next time..
Will he be a woman?2 -
As we saw back in 2011, magistrates and judges tend to take a very dim view indeed of organised public disorder.Carnyx said:
If the gent got two weeks for a Jimmy Riddle without malicious intent (to give him the benefit of the very real doubt) then I hate to think what the other sentences will be.Sandpit said:
I'd take a guess that most others involved in various types of altercations are yet to have their day in court. This guy turned up himself at a police station and pled guilty straight away. Many others are probably still being identified from CCTV and will take a while to get through the system.Pulpstar said:
I think all anyone asks for is consistency here. How long has the person who attempted to set fire to the Cenotaph flag received, anyone know ?Sandpit said:
That sounds awfully draconian, when a couple of days' community service cleaning the streets could have sufficed. Risks inflaming tensions, as noted by Konstantin Kisin, among others.FrancisUrquhart said:Pissy man has been given 14 days in jail...one day for every pint he had drunk.
The police were literally there when it happened so it's not like a burglary where it might be difficult to find the suspect.
What it will almost certainly do though, is for this man to end up as a martyr and rallying point for many of the unsavoury right-wing types, who see that after two weeks of violence the only guy apparently in prison is someone who was caught taking a piss.
The issues this year don't appear to have been on that scale (yet), but a few exemplary sentences at the start might do a good job of keeping a lid on things over the summer.1 -
Or a sentient Galapagos tortoise.Casino_Royale said:Like Doctor Who I’m just wondering who the Cornish time lord will come back as next time..
Will he be a woman?0 -
"Boris fanboy in denial". That is harsh indeed. It's probably fair, but it's very very harsh.Philip_Thompson said:
Thank you Sam.isam said:
That is quite incredible.Philip_Thompson said:Comparing final pre-election Johnson leader ratings to current Johnson leader ratings.
YouGov:
Final pre-election: Approve 41%, Disapprove 52% (Net -11%)
Most recent: Well 43%, Badly 50% (Net -7%)
2% Net swing from Badly to Approve
Opinium:
Final pre-election: Well 33%, Badly 47% (Net -14%)
Most recent: Approve 37%, Disapprove 43% (Net -6%)
4% Net swing from Disapprove to Well
IPSOS MORI:
Final pre-election: Approve 36%, Disapprove 56% (Net -20%)
Most recent: Satisfied 48%, Dissatisfied 49% (Net -1%)
9.5% Net swing from Dissatisfied to Approve
No Survation pre-election it seems to compare with. No recent Deltapoll to compare with.
So across all the pollsters there has been a net swing from pre-election in Boris's favour. Post-Cummings, post-COVID, post-Brexit as it stands the Johnson approval is higher as it stands than it was pre-election.
Since the GE there has been a pandemic killing tens of thousands, the government has locked everyone up, closed the schools and shut the pubs, there are race riots in the streets, and Labour have a shiny new leader, yet the stats are there for all to see - Boris is better thought of today than he was when he won an 80 seat majority.
I wouldn't have believed it if you hadn't shown it to be so. Great analysis Philip, there's not a lot of it about.
A more considered response than "A Boris fanboy in denial". I think its a shame OGH @MikeSmithson didn't reply in more detail to the analysis with the numbers involved.1 -
Yet again we have the site arsehole of arseholes pontificating. Get back in the gutter where you belong Dickhead.Nigel_Foremain said:
I am white and middle aged, but I find "gammon" very amusing. It is not racist because while it is probably necessary to be white to be a gammon, you are not automatically a gammon if you are white. You do have to be angry and prejudiced, so if the hat fits Mr Blue, lol. I think it would be a good description also for many Scottish Nationalists, as well as their similarly angry English nationalist lookalikes. You don't get much more gammon like than Malcolmg.BluestBlue said:
You're not good at basic logic, are you? The Nazis were indeed racists, but 'Nazi' is not in itself a racist term, but a technical description of political party.Mexicanpete said:
That is like saying one can't call a Nazi a Nazi, because the term Nazi is an offensive label that could cause offence. Ah, bless!BluestBlue said:
You think using racist terms for whites is compatible with anti-racism?Mexicanpete said:
It works for me.BluestBlue said:
Do you think that using terms like 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' enhances or detracts from your genuine commitment to the cause of anti-racism?RochdalePioneers said:A horrifying example of why we need the BLM movement this morning. In the queue for Wilko's. Rancid gammon in the queue talking to his rancid gammon mate on a nearby bench.
Black people should be used as whipping boys. Worse than dogs. Should be kicked instead of the dog. And then "see you later" as he went into the shop.
This is the kind of petty white scum bigotry that Johnson and his team have in mind when banging on about protecting our statues...
Well, at least that tells us all we need to know about the sincerity of your principles.
The terms used by RochdalePioneers, however - 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' - are intrinsically racist in themselves, and thus are not suitable political epithets.
This really isn't hard to understand. But now you've dug yourself into a deep hole of hypocrisy and don't want to admit it, so no doubt you'll keep digging...0 -
Yep. All inevitable since 24/6/16. At some point though the posh boys will lose control of it. And then it will get really ugly. And then the posh boys will make an accommodation with the new forces, and bingo...SouthamObserver said:
Judges, the EU and EU citizens, transgender people, the BBC, environmentalists, etc. There is a long line of "enemies" waiting to be teed up, all designed to create wedge points to keep the current Tory voting coalition together. I just wonder whether it will work - especially if we are slow to recover from what is coming later this year.0 -
I remember the trouble they got into when Matt Smith said ‘still not ginger’ on his first appearance.Casino_Royale said:Like Doctor Who I’m just wondering who the Cornish time lord will come back as next time..
Will he be a woman?
Most of the complainants didn’t understand the context (David Tennant’s first lines were, ‘Ohhhh, I wanted to be ginger’) or thought the writers were being homophobic. One or the other.1 -
Whatever the merits of the urinator's sentence the government simply has to grasp that everybody must be dealt with equally.
Selective justice, however well intentioned, is lethal to law and order.
You may as well set up recruiting stations for a significant party of the far right.1 -
Media astonished there seems to be a lot of demand for the shops2
-
A friend of mine - white, middle-aged and no Lefty - happily refers to some of the more stick-in-the-mud characters at his workplace as 'Gammons'.Nigel_Foremain said:
I am white and middle aged, but I find "gammon" very amusing. It is not racist because while it is probably necessary to be white to be a gammon, you are not automatically a gammon if you are white. You do have to be angry and prejudiced, so if the hat fits Mr Blue, lol. I think it would be a good description also for many Scottish Nationalists, as well as their similarly angry English nationalist lookalikes. You don't get much more gammon like than Malcolmg.BluestBlue said:
You're not good at basic logic, are you? The Nazis were indeed racists, but 'Nazi' is not in itself a racist term, but a technical description of political party.Mexicanpete said:
That is like saying one can't call a Nazi a Nazi, because the term Nazi is an offensive label that could cause offence. Ah, bless!BluestBlue said:
You think using racist terms for whites is compatible with anti-racism?Mexicanpete said:
It works for me.BluestBlue said:
Do you think that using terms like 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' enhances or detracts from your genuine commitment to the cause of anti-racism?RochdalePioneers said:A horrifying example of why we need the BLM movement this morning. In the queue for Wilko's. Rancid gammon in the queue talking to his rancid gammon mate on a nearby bench.
Black people should be used as whipping boys. Worse than dogs. Should be kicked instead of the dog. And then "see you later" as he went into the shop.
This is the kind of petty white scum bigotry that Johnson and his team have in mind when banging on about protecting our statues...
Well, at least that tells us all we need to know about the sincerity of your principles.
The terms used by RochdalePioneers, however - 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' - are intrinsically racist in themselves, and thus are not suitable political epithets.
This really isn't hard to understand. But now you've dug yourself into a deep hole of hypocrisy and don't want to admit it, so no doubt you'll keep digging...0 -
UK caves in to EU demand to share criminal suspects’ data
https://www.politico.eu/article/criminal-suspects-data-sharing-uk-eu-brexit/0 -
And he handed himself in and pled guilty.contrarian said:Whatever the merits of the urinator's sentence the government simply has to grasp that everybody must be dealt with equally.
Selective justice, however well intentioned, is lethal to law and order.
You may as well set up recruiting stations for a significant party of the far right.
How many people pissing in the streets get 14 days in prison?0 -
Well, you do wonder a bit what will happen to those who destroyed a grade 2 listed statue if taking a slash next to a memorial, however sensitive, is 14 days.contrarian said:Whatever the merits of the urinator's sentence the government simply has to grasp that everybody must be dealt with equally.
Selective justice, however well intentioned, is lethal to law and order.
You may as well set up recruiting stations for a significant party of the far right.
Six months?
I was expecting them to get a heavy fine and being bound over, and only prison if/when they refused to pay the fine. But it looks as though I may have been underrating the judicial system.1 -
That's a good definition but I wouldn't say it's "end of".Casino_Royale said:
Racism is discriminating against somebody based on their race.Dura_Ace said:
Racism = power + prejudice. White people have the power so no pejorative directed at them is racist.BluestBlue said:
You're not good at basic logic, are you? The Nazis were indeed racists, but 'Nazi' is not in itself a racist term, but a technical description of political party.
The terms used by RochdalePioneers, however - 'rancid gammon' and 'petty white scum' - are intrinsically racist in themselves, and thus are not suitable political epithets.
This really isn't hard to understand. But now you've dug yourself into a deep hole of hypocrisy and don't want to admit it, so no doubt you'll keep digging...
End of.
For example, discriminating against a disadvantaged group vs discriminating against an advantaged group.
For me, and I think for most people, there can be a meaningful difference there.0 -
It is a ridiculous sentence that will be overturned on appeal unless he has a truly spectacular record of doing much the same. But there is room for exemplary sentences as we saw at the time of the riots.contrarian said:Whatever the merits of the urinator's sentence the government simply has to grasp that everybody must be dealt with equally.
Selective justice, however well intentioned, is lethal to law and order.
You may as well set up recruiting stations for a significant party of the far right.0 -
They didn’t buy the narrative.Big_G_NorthWales said:Media astonished there seems to be a lot of demand for the shops
Pause.
Ah, my coat...0 -
Why, I wonder haven't we a name for, or any statements from (or about) the white alleged racist demonstrator who was carried out of harms way by the black guy in the now famous clip?0
-
When the the Gruppenfuhrerin shouts 'Achtung!' everyone sits up straight.kamski said:
Where I am in NRW (the most populous state), the ban on meeting more than one person from a different household only ever applied to public spaces. You were specifically allowed to invite as many people to your own home as you liked (although the advice was to avoid inviting lots). Other states had different rules.eristdoof said:
Maybe Germany's lucky break was that around the height of the Italian Meltdown a town near Aachen had a very significant outbreak. This meant that most people took the clear advice of the government very seriously. The extent of the lockdown here was slightly less than in the UK. For example partners who lived in different households were allowed to "see" each other, where as some in the UK lost their jobs because of that.Stuartinromford said:
And Spain, and Italy.Peter_the_Punter said:
Much softer than France, I believe.kamski said:
UK's lockdown was certainly not far softer than Germany's. A bit harder (and quite a bit longer) so far as I can tell. No doubt there are other European countries that also had softer lockdowns.MattW said:
I'm not sure that that is relevant.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
Was the *effect* any different. I don't recall significant differences in fall in transport usage, for example.
There was a comparative graph from Google data on Twitter somewhere, and I can't find it.
Knowing what we know now (and usual disclaimer, I'm a physicist who teaches GCSE science, so I know a bit of biology but not much...) it looks like:
1 You don't need particularly harsh measures to keep Covid-19 numbers constant. Stop the most extreme spreading events, wear masks, wash hands and have working testing and tracing. Germany got lucky, did enough early on that their numbers never got very big. Sweden is sort of doing the same, but with a higher baseline.
2 If you miss that early opportunity, your choices are more limited. Lockdowns work to reduce the rate of infection (it would be pretty weird if they didn't). The harder the lockdown, the faster the fall; compare China, Spain, UK, Sweden.
3 So if you are a government and you miss the bus on step 1, you have two Solomonesque judgments to make. First is do you go for a harsher, shorter lockdown or a softer, longer one? Most of Europe went for the first, the UK seems to have gone for the second- perhaps not realising that softer = longer. Second, when do you try to transition back to "we can control this with softer measures?" The temptation will be for the UK to relax controls when there is more virus about than in other countries. There are economic and social arguments for that, but it's a gamble.
I think part of the luck was that because there was, relatively, a lot of testing early on people knew about the outbreaks, and the outbreaks were kept a bit under control. But it did seem to me that most people were not taking it that seriously until the second week of March when Merkel finally broke her silence - then people suddenly started taking it seriously. 0 -
Well Spain is clearly not right!eristdoof said:
Daily Average number of Covid-19 deaths in the last 7 days (8-14th June)FF43 said:
Reason why I selected Log scale was that the absolute numbers now are all down at the X axis because all countries, UK included, are well off the peak. Log scale means that differences between countries now is visually downplayed. The UK comparative situation is actually worse than it might look.Phil said:
Also, the FT charts (as above) are logarithmic plots of the 7-day moving average. If you plot their data on a linear chart, it would be an obviously higher peak & steeper fall - about a factor of 7 from peak to today.MaxPB said:
If that graph was done by date of death the the peak would by higher and the drop would be steeper. Our lack of drop is deaths is a statistical phantom.FF43 said:
Not sure hospitalisation and ICU rates are that useful as point to point comparison. Not all Covid 19 sufferers end up in hospital and not all those that die from it go through ICU. What we can say is that the deaths came down much faster in France compared with the UK.NerysHughes said:
France still has double the number of people in hospital with Covid-19 and double the number in ICU than the UK has.FF43 said:
Agree that's one explanation for why the UK has problems now that France has substantially solved.Philip_Thompson said:
The UK lockdown was far softer than other nations.FF43 said:
Yes and also a couple of countries have issues with accuracy of reporting. Nevertheless infections are running many times higher in the UK than anywhere else in Europe, except Sweden. The difference is too big to explain, except that the UK has problems that other countries don't have.edmundintokyo said:
Just reporting *the last 7 days* is a bit tricksy since some of those countries are further along the curve than the UK.Scott_xP said:
It's not really necessary to play games like this to make the UK look incompetent, it looks incompetent already.
In France leaving the home without the official paperwork authorising you to do so and explaining when, where and why you are going was subject to a hefty fine.
In the UK you could go out and about whenever you wanted and just needed to say you had a good reason if asked why.
My point was that Scott's tweet is valid. The difference between the UK and other countries is too stark to be dismissed as playing games with statistics.
The UK will now be at or below average deaths for the time of year
The trend isn't our friend as far as the UK's epidemic response is concerned.
(Log charts are good for observing changes in rates of change between widely differing scales, but are not good for comparing absolute quantities by eye.)
Here’s a link to a linear plot of UK deaths/million so far: https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=gbr&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&cumulative=0&logScale=0&perMillion=1&values=deaths
In alphabetical order
Belgium 8
France 36
Germany 13
Italy 63
Spain 0
Sweden 31
UK 165
Source Worldometers0 -
Really? That's not great. I just use it for music myself. Sounds like I ought to stick with that.edmundintokyo said:
Weirdly, despite very mysterious comment moderation and demonetizing the accounts of people who dress too sexily while reviewing 3D printing equipment and pulse oximetry gadgets, YouTube will still autoplay straight-up racist propaganda videos after ordinary stuff about civil rights.kinabalu said:
Draining the swamp.eadric said:OK guys, do we all remember the Google Churchill kerfuffle? We should do, it was yesterday.
Here's another one, which is even weirder
Go to Youtube, and select a random video. Doesn't matter which one. Add this comment underneath:
"Black Lives Matter violence"
Within 30 seconds or so, it will be automatically deleted. I'm not joking. I did it last night, and I did it this morning: same result both times.
Now I can understand why Youtube might censor certain racist terms. But if you want to comment that this is "Black Lives Matter violence", which is not racist, just an opinion, you cannot.
Same goes for things like "this is black violence", or "what about black violence". They just disappear.
YouTube is preventing commenters from simply expressing lawful opinions
YouTube's recommendation algorithm *is* the swamp.0
