nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

Of course not.

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

Do you want people to exercise? If so, I suggest we don't adopt that as policy.

Johnson isn’t exercising that should be an exclusion as long as not in crowded areas

You are trying to make your own rules that nobody has to comply with mainly because you dislike everything Boris does

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Newcastle United could still have new owners before the start of next season

Exclusive: American businessman Henry Mauriss believes he is in pole position to buy after a takeover by a Saudi-led consortium collapsed....


...Not much is known about the American, but Telegraph Sport has been assured by those close to the deal that he has a well financed and well planned project that includes the money to not only buy the club, but to also invest in it.

It is understood the loose business model will be based on the approach taken by FSF at Liverpool, with budgeted, gradual growth at the core of the mission statement.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/30/newcastle-united-could-still-have-new-owners-start-next-season/

That is honestly the best possible scenario for Newcastle and I hope it goes through for them.

Much better a reputable business like that than selling your soul to the Saudis or continuing with that swine Ashley.

Though I assume they mean FSG and not FSF?

Yeah but what you don't want is for him to end up being Hicks and Gillet style chancers. For Liverpool that wasn't a complete disaster because they were always going to be bought before administration, for Newcastle it would be tough to find a buyer that would purchase pre-administration. Aiui, Liverpool were weeks away from the points deduction and it was only because the banks forced the sale of the club before that happened and permanently damaged the asset.

Even Man United had a few dodgy PIKs that the Glazers used and needed to float the company in Singapore to get rid of. Whatever anyone says about Ashley, he's never going to let Newcastle go bankrupt. This new buyer feels more like Hicks and Gillet than FSG or even the Glazers.

Indeed even with all the stick Ashley gets, he's not as I understood it loaded any debts onto the club. That's quite impressive compared to many owners.

Indeed, and we've seen even big clubs like Liverpool can be brought to near relegation by owners who load up clubs with unsustainable debts. Newcastle would probably end up like Blackburn with that type of owner, double relegation.

Indeed. Look how long its taken Leeds United to get back into the Premier League.

Exactly, and Leeds are a club with a comparable history and fan base to Newcastle.

Ashley is the focal point of a lot of hate from Newcastle fans, but ultimately it's the players and managers who haven't delivered good football. Spurs have had an almost negative net transfer spend for the better part of a decade and a decade ago we were finishing in the rubbish mid table positions.

It's all about making good signings, isn't it? In the case of Spurs it was Carrick, then Berbatov, then Bale and Modric. With Liverpool it was Suarez and Coutinho (with Sterling coming through too). And before both of them there was Arsenal and Anelka. All of those signings were sold and funded greater things.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

Of course not.

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

Do you want people to exercise? If so, I suggest we don't adopt that as policy.

Johnson isn’t exercising that should be an exclusion as long as not in crowded areas

You are trying to make your own rules that nobody has to comply with mainly because you dislike everything Boris does

Not quite in the league of Scott, most of what Johnson does and says I can’t be bothered commenting on. I only got involved because someone called him a c*** Scott that is not Johnson. Not very nice in my opinion

Charles said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

I suspect the vast majority of those dead soldiers were not Nazis.

He was making a valid point about the cost of war and its impact on families. McMillin chose to make it about politics

Dead conscripts on both sides is a tragedy.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1288934092936024064

Oh F***.

Well done Burnham, responsible response. I've been quite impressed with him since he became Mayor.

Good to whackamole an outbreak before it gets much more serious.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1288934092936024064

Oh F***.

At least they aren't mucking about. Unfortunately this is probably going to happen repeatedly in a number of areas until a vaccine is available.

tlg86 said:

dixiedean said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Newcastle United could still have new owners before the start of next season

Exclusive: American businessman Henry Mauriss believes he is in pole position to buy after a takeover by a Saudi-led consortium collapsed....


...Not much is known about the American, but Telegraph Sport has been assured by those close to the deal that he has a well financed and well planned project that includes the money to not only buy the club, but to also invest in it.

It is understood the loose business model will be based on the approach taken by FSF at Liverpool, with budgeted, gradual growth at the core of the mission statement.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/30/newcastle-united-could-still-have-new-owners-start-next-season/

That is honestly the best possible scenario for Newcastle and I hope it goes through for them.

Much better a reputable business like that than selling your soul to the Saudis or continuing with that swine Ashley.

Though I assume they mean FSG and not FSF?

Yeah but what you don't want is for him to end up being Hicks and Gillet style chancers. For Liverpool that wasn't a complete disaster because they were always going to be bought before administration, for Newcastle it would be tough to find a buyer that would purchase pre-administration. Aiui, Liverpool were weeks away from the points deduction and it was only because the banks forced the sale of the club before that happened and permanently damaged the asset.

Even Man United had a few dodgy PIKs that the Glazers used and needed to float the company in Singapore to get rid of. Whatever anyone says about Ashley, he's never going to let Newcastle go bankrupt. This new buyer feels more like Hicks and Gillet than FSG or even the Glazers.

Indeed even with all the stick Ashley gets, he's not as I understood it loaded any debts onto the club. That's quite impressive compared to many owners.

Partially that is due to the fact that he doesn't own the ground. It has always been Council.
And also cos he tries to turn a profit.
Which is why NUFC simultaneously punch above and below their weight.

What is their weight, though? Is it above or below Everton, who have spent a fortune to get to 12th in the league.

A good question. They are perfectly capable of being regular European contenders.
But Ashley tries to make money. Which is not what modern football is about.
As for Everton.
Don't ask

nichomar said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

Of course not.

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

tlg86 said:

nichomar said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outside and socially distanced?

Still should be setting an example and has he told us how many the net increase in police numbers are since the recruitment drive?

There's no requirement to wear a mask outside. If they were wearing a mask, questions would be asked as to why it isn't policy. Simple as that.

Maybe it should be

Do you want people to exercise? If so, I suggest we don't adopt that as policy.

Johnson isn’t exercising that should be an exclusion as long as not in crowded areas

You are trying to make your own rules that nobody has to comply with mainly because you dislike everything Boris does

Not quite in the league of Scott, most of what Johnson does and says I can’t be bothered commenting on. I only got involved because someone called him a c*** Scott that is not Johnson. Not very nice in my opinion

I rarely agree with anything Scott posts but I reject that language to any poster

tlg86 said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Newcastle United could still have new owners before the start of next season

Exclusive: American businessman Henry Mauriss believes he is in pole position to buy after a takeover by a Saudi-led consortium collapsed....


...Not much is known about the American, but Telegraph Sport has been assured by those close to the deal that he has a well financed and well planned project that includes the money to not only buy the club, but to also invest in it.

It is understood the loose business model will be based on the approach taken by FSF at Liverpool, with budgeted, gradual growth at the core of the mission statement.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/30/newcastle-united-could-still-have-new-owners-start-next-season/

That is honestly the best possible scenario for Newcastle and I hope it goes through for them.

Much better a reputable business like that than selling your soul to the Saudis or continuing with that swine Ashley.

Though I assume they mean FSG and not FSF?

Yeah but what you don't want is for him to end up being Hicks and Gillet style chancers. For Liverpool that wasn't a complete disaster because they were always going to be bought before administration, for Newcastle it would be tough to find a buyer that would purchase pre-administration. Aiui, Liverpool were weeks away from the points deduction and it was only because the banks forced the sale of the club before that happened and permanently damaged the asset.

Even Man United had a few dodgy PIKs that the Glazers used and needed to float the company in Singapore to get rid of. Whatever anyone says about Ashley, he's never going to let Newcastle go bankrupt. This new buyer feels more like Hicks and Gillet than FSG or even the Glazers.

Indeed even with all the stick Ashley gets, he's not as I understood it loaded any debts onto the club. That's quite impressive compared to many owners.

Indeed, and we've seen even big clubs like Liverpool can be brought to near relegation by owners who load up clubs with unsustainable debts. Newcastle would probably end up like Blackburn with that type of owner, double relegation.

Indeed. Look how long its taken Leeds United to get back into the Premier League.

Exactly, and Leeds are a club with a comparable history and fan base to Newcastle.

Ashley is the focal point of a lot of hate from Newcastle fans, but ultimately it's the players and managers who haven't delivered good football. Spurs have had an almost negative net transfer spend for the better part of a decade and a decade ago we were finishing in the rubbish mid table positions.

It's all about making good signings, isn't it? In the case of Spurs it was Carrick, then Berbatov, then Bale and Modric. With Liverpool it was Suarez and Coutinho (with Sterling coming through too). And before both of them there was Arsenal and Anelka. All of those signings were sold and funded greater things.

True, and not being a selling club. Part of our problem in the late noughties was that we were a feeder club for bigger PL clubs, I think Levy definitely changed that mentality after Berbatov and we now sell our star players overseas so we aren't strengthening our rivals. Now there's no chance that if Kane leaves that we'd allow him to be sold to a PL club, he'd end up at Juve or Madrid for £100m+ in transfer fees. Newcastle would end up selling a Kane style player for £40m to Man United.

dixiedean said:

tlg86 said:

dixiedean said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Newcastle United could still have new owners before the start of next season

Exclusive: American businessman Henry Mauriss believes he is in pole position to buy after a takeover by a Saudi-led consortium collapsed....


...Not much is known about the American, but Telegraph Sport has been assured by those close to the deal that he has a well financed and well planned project that includes the money to not only buy the club, but to also invest in it.

It is understood the loose business model will be based on the approach taken by FSF at Liverpool, with budgeted, gradual growth at the core of the mission statement.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/07/30/newcastle-united-could-still-have-new-owners-start-next-season/

That is honestly the best possible scenario for Newcastle and I hope it goes through for them.

Much better a reputable business like that than selling your soul to the Saudis or continuing with that swine Ashley.

Though I assume they mean FSG and not FSF?

Yeah but what you don't want is for him to end up being Hicks and Gillet style chancers. For Liverpool that wasn't a complete disaster because they were always going to be bought before administration, for Newcastle it would be tough to find a buyer that would purchase pre-administration. Aiui, Liverpool were weeks away from the points deduction and it was only because the banks forced the sale of the club before that happened and permanently damaged the asset.

Even Man United had a few dodgy PIKs that the Glazers used and needed to float the company in Singapore to get rid of. Whatever anyone says about Ashley, he's never going to let Newcastle go bankrupt. This new buyer feels more like Hicks and Gillet than FSG or even the Glazers.

Indeed even with all the stick Ashley gets, he's not as I understood it loaded any debts onto the club. That's quite impressive compared to many owners.

Partially that is due to the fact that he doesn't own the ground. It has always been Council.
And also cos he tries to turn a profit.
Which is why NUFC simultaneously punch above and below their weight.

What is their weight, though? Is it above or below Everton, who have spent a fortune to get to 12th in the league.

A good question. They are perfectly capable of being regular European contenders.
But Ashley tries to make money. Which is not what modern football is about.
As for Everton.
Don't ask

Has football ever been about making money? All that's changed since Jack Walker bought the Premier League with Blackburn is the number of digits.

Ultimately there is only one Kevin De Bruyne, and even if all 20 PL clubs had the riches of Man City, three would be relegated at the end of the season. And then there are irritating clubs like Sheff Utd who manage to gatecrash the Top 10 without spending huge amounts.

Charles said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outdoors and socially distant

That'll be the 20,000 that this Tory government got rid of in 2010s.

rottenborough said:

Charles said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outdoors and socially distant

That'll be the 20,000 that this Tory government got rid of in 2010s.

Do we know the net increase in police numbers yet? Someone out there must know

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

Charles said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

I suspect the vast majority of those dead soldiers were not Nazis.

He was making a valid point about the cost of war and its impact on families. McMillin chose to make it about politics

Certainly none of the WW1 German dead there would have been Nazis.....

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

dixiedean said:

nichomar said:

rottenborough said:

Charles said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outdoors and socially distant

That'll be the 20,000 that this Tory government got rid of in 2010s.

Do we know the net increase in police numbers yet? Someone out there must know

nichomar said:

rottenborough said:

Charles said:

Scott_xP said:

Parts of Yorkshire on lockdown again.

Where was BoZo today?

https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1288858207184736258

Without a fucking mask!

Outdoors and socially distant

That'll be the 20,000 that this Tory government got rid of in 2010s.

Do we know the net increase in police numbers yet? Someone out there must know

The annual number needed to replace those leaving is 8000.
So 4000 by July.

So about standstill which is better than doing nothing

Philip_Thompson said:

rottenborough said:

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

Until we have a vaccine.

Even lockdowns are getting softer and softer.

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1288931539326316545

No we seem to be able to get hair cuts in Leicester.

https://twitter.com/JonAshworth/status/1288943671849684992?s=09

rottenborough said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rottenborough said:

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

Until we have a vaccine.

Even lockdowns are getting softer and softer.

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1288931539326316545

There may not be a vaccine for years. What then?

Fair question and goodness knows

rottenborough said:

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

For ages, I should think. Everyone I know (including lots of critics of the Government) think that semi-normality plus occasional lockdowns is a reasonablew compromise, compared with permanent lockdown or reckless embrace of risk. Lots of us are very critical of the early stages of the Government's response, and we reserve judg,ment on what's coming, but the intermittent local lockdowns seem sensible.

On the other hand - I had a delivery from Sainsbury this evening at 930pm. I said I hoped I wass his last customer - he said no, he had three more still to do, and Sainsbury was pushing drivers to keep going after 10 now. "It's OK for now but I'm dreading tthe winter and having to do this in the dark".

rottenborough said:

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

I suspect it will be a long time before the media - and they are important - accept this as a choice. The good (if you can call it that) news is that for the moment most of the world is in the same boat. That should give us some room for managing the economic problems without the pound completely tanking. But it is going to be painful either way.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1288942028404011011/photo/1

Hancock's barking mad. The default for all consultations should be video?

The virus has done his head in. Time for a new Health Sec in the reshuffle.

Its a very good idea. Sitting in a crowded room of sick people waiting to be seen is the last thing anyone should want. Going into a waiting room with other sick people should only be done if necessary.

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

I suspect it will be a long time before the media - and they are important - accept this as a choice. The good (if you can call it that) news is that for the moment most of the world is in the same boat. That should give us some room for managing the economic problems without the pound completely tanking. But it is going to be painful either way.

You can tell the Gov't is taking the virus seriously when the journos are squeaking

Foxy said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

The Wehrmacht were far from innocent too, they were widely involved in Nazi atrocities.

They were. Their dead though were largely conscripts who had little choice but to fight.

There should be a difference between how we view the atrocities of the Nazis, and how we view the tragedy of graveyards. Mass graves are tragic, no matter who is buried in them.

rottenborough said:

A GP's practice is part of the community, part of the social glue. A video-only service will just add to the atomisation and isolation that is rampant in our modern society.

And incidentally, someone tell the BMA that this opens the door to the person doing the consultation over video being anywhere in the world where they have a recognised qualification.

I think they would still need UK registration. A GP friend of mine now does 85% of his consultations by phone or video. He sees a half dozen or so patients per day.

It may work for some issues, but for some symptoms is pointless, and others dangerous.

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

rottenborough said:

A GP's practice is part of the community, part of the social glue. A video-only service will just add to the atomisation and isolation that is rampant in our modern society.

And incidentally, someone tell the BMA that this opens the door to the person doing the consultation over video being anywhere in the world where they have a recognised qualification.

Oh come off it!

The GPs practice is the last place anyone should be going for "socialising". If bloody hypochondriacs are going there to socialise then getting rid of that is fantastic news.

Getting rid of cramming old and vulnerable sick people into the same room to catch each other's contagions is a very good idea.

Cyclefree said:

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

I'm guessing it was that or an injection of lead into the back of the head.

Nobody is mourning Nazis, but remembering the war dead and saying we want to avoid the horrors of war going forwards . . . how has that become a political issue?

rottenborough said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

A GP's practice is part of the community, part of the social glue. A video-only service will just add to the atomisation and isolation that is rampant in our modern society.

And incidentally, someone tell the BMA that this opens the door to the person doing the consultation over video being anywhere in the world where they have a recognised qualification.

No it isn't, no one *wants* to sit in the GP waiting room, it's a chore.

A video conversation is not the same as a real conversation, as we have all found out in the last four months.

So if someone needs a face to face conversation they can come in for one - but when they come in for one they won't be crammed into a room full of dozens of other people coughing and spluttering.

Foxy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

The Wehrmacht were far from innocent too, they were widely involved in Nazi atrocities.

They were. Their dead though were largely conscripts who had little choice but to fight.

There should be a difference between how we view the atrocities of the Nazis, and how we view the tragedy of graveyards. Mass graves are tragic, no matter who is buried in them.

It is a myth though. The rare examples of Wehrmacht troops refusing to kill Jews or other civilians, very rarely resulted in punishment. Usually they were simply given other duties.

A brutal regime and peer pressure normalises a lot of atrocities, and most went along with it. Whether conscript or fanatic volunteer matters little.

Oh indeed, but troops who refused to serve in the military and refused to fight the British, Russians or Americans etc? They would have struggled surely. The soldiers our soldiers were fighting were there because they had to be not because they were passionate Nazis.

rottenborough said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

A GP's practice is part of the community, part of the social glue. A video-only service will just add to the atomisation and isolation that is rampant in our modern society.

And incidentally, someone tell the BMA that this opens the door to the person doing the consultation over video being anywhere in the world where they have a recognised qualification.

No it isn't, no one *wants* to sit in the GP waiting room, it's a chore.

A video conversation is not the same as a real conversation, as we have all found out in the last four months.

For GPs it is. I say that not having been to a GP in years and having used Babylon for all of my GP needs for two years. Video appointments are the right move and eventually we should get rid of those too and not have GPs.

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

I'm guessing it was that or an injection of lead into the back of the head.

Nobody is mourning Nazis, but remembering the war dead and saying we want to avoid the horrors of war going forwards . . . how has that become a political issue?

No, there is no record of the Wehrmacht executing soldiers who refused to kill prisoners or civilians:

https://www.deseret.com/1995/3/9/19163367/holocaust-those-who-defied-orders-to-kill-jews-did-not-die-researcher-says-at-byu

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

I'm guessing it was that or an injection of lead into the back of the head.

Nobody is mourning Nazis, but remembering the war dead and saying we want to avoid the horrors of war going forwards . . . how has that become a political issue?

'Manfred Oldenburg, in his book Ideology and Military Calculation, stated that there are no known cases where the refusal to participate in an execution of civilians has led to drastic consequences for soldiers of the Wehrmacht or SS.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Befehlsnotstand

We were talking about 30,000 dead soldiers in the cemetery.

Do you think all 30,000 of those buried dead soldiers are in their grave because they executed civilians?

IshmaelZ said:

MaxPB said:

Yes, a big portion of remainers want the trade talks to fail to get their "I told you so" moment.

How can you see far enough into their heads to know that? They might want the talks to succeed but think that failure will have the merit of showing what a bunch of complete and utter thors leavers actually are. Which it will.

I think I can claim to be one of PB "arch-remainers" and definitely no fan of Brexit. I do not give a d*mn whether it succeeds or fails.

I do not want it to fail. I just think that it will fail.

Cyclefree said:

Foxy said:

rottenborough said:

A GP's practice is part of the community, part of the social glue. A video-only service will just add to the atomisation and isolation that is rampant in our modern society.

And incidentally, someone tell the BMA that this opens the door to the person doing the consultation over video being anywhere in the world where they have a recognised qualification.

I think they would still need UK registration. A GP friend of mine now does 85% of his consultations by phone or video. He sees a half dozen or so patients per day.

It may work for some issues, but for some symptoms is pointless, and others dangerous.

How does a doctor feel swollen glands or listen to your chest by phone or video? Or inspect a swollen hot red leg? Or feel a breast lump?

I’m sure simple stuff can be sorted via phone but as someone with a history of complicated conditions, which were only discovered by extensive in person tests and, in one case, a sharp-eyed experienced GP who realised that 3 bouts of pneumonia in 6 months was not normal in a 23 year old, I worry about changes which might make it harder for these sorts of conditions to be seen early enough.

This should not be used as a way of limiting access to GPs even more. But if it frees them up to do the important stuff so much the better.

If.

Which is why we need walk in centres open from 7am-11pm 7 days a week. No messing about with appointments 3 weeks away.

Named GPs are a waste of time and money.

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

I'm guessing it was that or an injection of lead into the back of the head.

Nobody is mourning Nazis, but remembering the war dead and saying we want to avoid the horrors of war going forwards . . . how has that become a political issue?

No, there is no record of the Wehrmacht executing soldiers who refused to kill prisoners or civilians:

https://www.deseret.com/1995/3/9/19163367/holocaust-those-who-defied-orders-to-kill-jews-did-not-die-researcher-says-at-byu

How is that relevant to why they are in the cemetery?

I thought it was a cemetery for dead soldiers killed by the war, not a cemetery dedicated to only those who killed prisoners or civilians?

Because the Wehrmacht was intimately involved in those atrocities.

My brother married a German woman who had two uncles die on the Eastern front, but as my father pointed out (out of earshot!) they shouldn't have been there in the first place. I agree.

Philip_Thompson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

I'm guessing it was that or an injection of lead into the back of the head.

Nobody is mourning Nazis, but remembering the war dead and saying we want to avoid the horrors of war going forwards . . . how has that become a political issue?

'Manfred Oldenburg, in his book Ideology and Military Calculation, stated that there are no known cases where the refusal to participate in an execution of civilians has led to drastic consequences for soldiers of the Wehrmacht or SS.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Befehlsnotstand

We were talking about 30,000 dead soldiers in the cemetery.

Do you think all 30,000 of those buried dead soldiers are in their grave because they executed civilians?

Who said they were?

MaxPB said:

Cyclefree said:

Foxy said:

rottenborough said:

A GP's practice is part of the community, part of the social glue. A video-only service will just add to the atomisation and isolation that is rampant in our modern society.

And incidentally, someone tell the BMA that this opens the door to the person doing the consultation over video being anywhere in the world where they have a recognised qualification.

I think they would still need UK registration. A GP friend of mine now does 85% of his consultations by phone or video. He sees a half dozen or so patients per day.

It may work for some issues, but for some symptoms is pointless, and others dangerous.

How does a doctor feel swollen glands or listen to your chest by phone or video? Or inspect a swollen hot red leg? Or feel a breast lump?

I’m sure simple stuff can be sorted via phone but as someone with a history of complicated conditions, which were only discovered by extensive in person tests and, in one case, a sharp-eyed experienced GP who realised that 3 bouts of pneumonia in 6 months was not normal in a 23 year old, I worry about changes which might make it harder for these sorts of conditions to be seen early enough.

This should not be used as a way of limiting access to GPs even more. But if it frees them up to do the important stuff so much the better.

If.

Which is why we need walk in centres open from 7am-11pm 7 days a week. No messing about with appointments 3 weeks away.

Named GPs are a waste of time and money.

My GP in London has emergency appointments available every single day. Same in Cumbria. No reason why that can’t be routine, along with video/phone consultations - where appropriate, not as a default - and face-to-face ones.

Foxy said:

IshmaelZ said:

Foxy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Cyclefree said:

IshmaelZ said:

Alistair said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Alistair said:

My Man Evan McMullin (probably my best value loser after my Stein vote percentage bet) nails it in one

https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1288912573929263105?s=19

Yes, lots of Nazis in WW1...

There 30, 000+ in the cemetery. Less than 100 are WW1 casualties.

That's OK then. Let's all laugh at 29,900 dead Germans.

You do realise that not everybody in the Wehrmacht was a Nazi? And that many if not most of them were conscripts and therefore by any reasonable definition, victims of Nazism?

The Wehrmacht were not innocents in WW2. Particularly on the Eastern Front they were involved in atrocities and war crimes, though that does not mean every single soldier was. Nor does it mean that every soldier was a card-carrying Nazi. But I thought that every soldier had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to Hitler, no?

I'm guessing it was that or an injection of lead into the back of the head.

Nobody is mourning Nazis, but remembering the war dead and saying we want to avoid the horrors of war going forwards . . . how has that become a political issue?

No, there is no record of the Wehrmacht executing soldiers who refused to kill prisoners or civilians:

https://www.deseret.com/1995/3/9/19163367/holocaust-those-who-defied-orders-to-kill-jews-did-not-die-researcher-says-at-byu

There are cast iron documented cases of appalling atrocities by UK troops in ww2; see Beevor, passim. You going to call off Remembrance day?

As a matter of fact, I resolved in 2018 that a century of commemoration is long enough. I no longer mark Remembrance Day.

Fair enough. But it’s not just for WW1 anymore. Or indeed at all but for those who have died more recently.

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

To play devil's advocate, how long are we going to tolerate a situation where we are in and out of lockdowns like this?

Perhaps Sumption is right and we have to live with it and get on with lives.

I suspect it will be a long time before the media - and they are important - accept this as a choice. The good (if you can call it that) news is that for the moment most of the world is in the same boat. That should give us some room for managing the economic problems without the pound completely tanking. But it is going to be painful either way.

We are living with it now. We have no choice in the matter. We are already suffering not just its health consequences but now the economic ones, as the rising number of redundancies and jobs lost in recent weeks and days show.

DavidL said:

Theuniondivvie said:

DavidL said:

Having Ruth back until the next election would be a massive step forward for the Scottish Tories. Carlaw was just never up to the job. To be effective as opposition leader you need wit.

Ruth did an interview with the ST last weekend. What a remarkable coincidence.

The last outing for the Ruth Davidson No to Indy Ref II party couldn't be called an unalloyed success.

European Election 2019: Scotland

Conservative 11.6% (-5.6)

A lot of Tories boycotted that election because they were pissed off that we hadn’t left yet. Not sure it tells us much.

What will the excuse be for the upcoming May massacre