New Ipsos MORI polling finds nearly half of Brits having favourable view of Biden – politicalbetting
Options
Comments
-
An issue for the EU, surely? However the UK's position is consistent with how it treats other international organizations. Full ambassadorial privileges are reserved for sovereign nations.Theuniondivvie said:
What’s his diplomatic status now?RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.2 -
Listened to the leader of Wrexham Council earlier this morning who did confirm that they have taken measures to protect the factory and to be honest he did not seem alarmedFrancisUrquhart said:On FFS....
FIREFIGHTERS are battling to save a factory producing the Oxford Covid vaccine in North Wales from flooding caused by Storm Christoph. Emergency services raced to Wrexham Industrial Estate last night to protect the jab - as 2,000 homes across England were evacuated following torrential rainfall overnight.0 -
Surely the shattering effect of #nodealNicola is yet to kick in?Carnyx said:https://www.thenational.scot/news/19024068.nicola-sturgeon-englands-favourite-political-leader-poll-finds/?ref=twtrec
"Nicola Sturgeon is the UK's best respected party leader, according to the latest polling.
Work by Opinium for the Observer shows 40% of people in Scotland "strongly approve" of the way she's doing her job.
That compares with a rating of 11% for Tory PM Boris Johnson, 4% for Labour head Keir Starmer and 3% for Ed Davey of the LibDems. [...]
Sturgeon also leads the pack for voters in the UK as a whole — with 42% approval to Johnson's 34%.
Even in England, 41% of people approve of the way she's doing her job, compared with 38% for Starmer, 34% for Johnson and 14% for Davey.
And when the disapproval ratings are brought in, that leaves Sturgeon as the only one of the four in positive numbers in Scotland, with Johnson plummeting to -25% while the SNP head is at +28%.
In fact, Johnson is on negative numbers everywhere, while Sturgeon is on +13% for the UK as a whole and +12% for England."0 -
Isn't the issue that Sturgeon allegedly knew about the complaints before she told Holyrood she did and hence is in breach of the ministerial code - but the investigation isn't pursuing this?DavidL said:
The central charge, so far as I can make it out, is that Sturgeon met the former leader of the SNP at her Official residence without civil servants being present. That this was a crime so heinous that it had "parallels with Watergate" goes beyond hyperbole into hysteria.OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/jamesmatthewsky/status/1351927574130262022?s=20
https://twitter.com/jamesmatthewsky/status/1351927970613653509?s=20
https://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-faces-more-questions-over-alex-salmond-bullying-claims-after-internal-emails-leaked-121922671 -
If we take it to mean hectoring and lecturing ABOUT social justice but with no genuine interest IN social justice then Woke becomes - literally by definition - a bad thing that at best irritates and at worst detracts from the cause (of social justice). But this is to conflate the cause with the demerits of some of the people involved in it. Any movement can be (unfairly) attacked in this way.Cyclefree said:
@Casino_Royale wrote a very good post yesterday on woke-ism: the difference between being awake to and dealing with oppression and its consequences vs a somewhat narcissistic insistence on symbolic gesture and telling people what to think unaccompanied by any effective action to help people.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, I watched yesterday. I thought it was an acceptable speech, but not an especially historically memorable one; it just looks like that right now because everyone is so relieved he's not Trump.Northern_Al said:
I think you've been wholly captured by anti-wokeism. Did you watch yesterday? Lots of humility and decency on show, and a good celebration of modern, diverse USA. Biden will do what he says, and govern for all decent Americans. But yes, he won't pander to the EDL equivalents or neo-fascists of the far right. Because they're not decent.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Like our government, you're obsessed by symbols/statues. But it's not substance. Let me give you an example. While Jenrick puts forward legislation on statues, he does sweet FA to tackle real issues of substance, For example, tens of thousands of people are trapped in buildings with cladding that needs removing; they can't sell, and many face huge bills. Following Grenfell, how much progress has been made in resolving this? Not a lot.
Your priorities are all wrong.
Your comparison is an entirely false one. Opposition to "Wokeism" ≠ support for the EDL or neo-fascists, and it's offensive to say it does. I explored the difference on here last night - you should read what I said.
Governments, can and do, enact hundreds of policies across dozens of policy areas all at once, and are both capable of doing so and expected to do it. As it happens, I think the Government should make the relief of leaseholders trapped in flats by poor cladding a high priority and get it fixed with a Government guarantee. However, I also think he should address politically-motivated cultural desecration as well. What people mean by "he's got his priorities all wrong" is "we'd prefer if he didn't address this issue" There's no reason Robert Paden Powell, Redvers Buller, Oliver Cromwell, or Admiral Nelson, should be removed without due democratic process just so councillors can signal their virtue and appease their fanatical base. This was a gap in the law and urgently needed addressing before many more irrevocably came down.
My priorities are not wrong. I also want a united, less divided society. Symbols matter, and rather than negatively tearing things down and dividing people we should be adding to them with new symbols that say things about us today, and celebrate the best of us.
Your blindness to how both sides are aggravating it at present with their language and action is a huge part of the problem.
You'd be well-advised to be more reflective and balanced in your posts on the matter, in future.0 -
It does depend though whether it is supply or manpower that is on your critical path. It is likely to be a 10 fold difference in numbers done, but if the person doing it is not doing vaccinations in a centre then it is a no brainer.MaxPB said:
Yes, having vaccination teams door knocking is going to really get those last 30% of over 80s done quickly. It's also something that doesn't need to rely on local infrastructure.TOPPING said:
And as noted yesterday - they are also rolling out in-home vaccinations.FrancisUrquhart said:The UK is giving 200 vaccinations every minute, Health Secretary Matt Hancock says
He says the UK has now given more than five million doses of the vaccine to 4.6 million people.
It comes as 65 new vaccination centres are due to open in England today, including a mosque in Birmingham and a cinema in Aylesbury.0 -
As I have already said that is because he doesn't qualify for it under the 1964 law.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/13521561664664985603 -
I think one has to accept limits to free trade. Ultimately, there comes a point where the loss of self-government become more important than marginal boosts to GDP.Cyclefree said:
As @rcs1000 has explained a gazillion times, effective economic unity necessarily requires a degree of political unity. See, for instance, the Singke Market. It simply is not possible to have the sort of trading relationship there was in the Singke Market without some degree of political integration. The amount of such integration is the issue, of course.Mysticrose said:
Exactly.Richard_Tyndall said:
Actually that tweet is wrong. Britain consistently opposed the status of the EEAS as it is known and blocked it having full diplomatic status on organisations such as the UN and OSCE.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1352195106837770240Mysticrose said:I don't think the EU should have ambassadorial status and I don't think it's petty. For good or ill we did Brexit and we marked ourselves out as a nation state. We live with that and by that. The EU should be no exception.
If you believe in Brexit, which I didn't, then it's consistent and right.
I think it's consistent and right that following Brexit we take this decision. I hope Boris sticks to his guns on it, although I'm doubtful he will.
It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
I was a Remainer but the EU's worst trait has been its attempt to shift from economic unity to political unity. Vive la difference!
That is why the claim that we want only the trade and not the political stuff was nonsense. And why now - because we have decided against the political stuff - we are realising the cost to our trade.3 -
2
-
How does the in-home vaccination work? Do you need to register as needing it when you try and book a slot?kjh said:
It does depend though whether it is supply or manpower that is on your critical path. It is likely to be a 10 fold difference in numbers done, but if the person doing it is not doing vaccinations in a centre then it is a no brainer.MaxPB said:
Yes, having vaccination teams door knocking is going to really get those last 30% of over 80s done quickly. It's also something that doesn't need to rely on local infrastructure.TOPPING said:
And as noted yesterday - they are also rolling out in-home vaccinations.FrancisUrquhart said:The UK is giving 200 vaccinations every minute, Health Secretary Matt Hancock says
He says the UK has now given more than five million doses of the vaccine to 4.6 million people.
It comes as 65 new vaccination centres are due to open in England today, including a mosque in Birmingham and a cinema in Aylesbury.0 -
But that's an issue of manpower which we can throw bodies at. Hiring an extra few teams to knock on doors doesn't preclude opening more vaccination centres. As k said yesterday, it's like having a multicore processor vs a single core one. You run as many threads in parallel as feasible and door knocking will be the difference between getting to 70-80% of immobile groups jabbed and 95-100% done.kjh said:
It does depend though whether it is supply or manpower that is on your critical path. It is likely to be a 10 fold difference in numbers done, but if the person doing it is not doing vaccinations in a centre then it is a no brainer.MaxPB said:
Yes, having vaccination teams door knocking is going to really get those last 30% of over 80s done quickly. It's also something that doesn't need to rely on local infrastructure.TOPPING said:
And as noted yesterday - they are also rolling out in-home vaccinations.FrancisUrquhart said:The UK is giving 200 vaccinations every minute, Health Secretary Matt Hancock says
He says the UK has now given more than five million doses of the vaccine to 4.6 million people.
It comes as 65 new vaccination centres are due to open in England today, including a mosque in Birmingham and a cinema in Aylesbury.1 -
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.0 -
Some GPs appear to be completely indifferent to vaccination, whereas others are completely on top of everyone. People who have mobility issues need to be top of the priority list.FrancisUrquhart said:A housebound 84-year-old woman says she has been told she may have to wait up to two months to have her coronavirus vaccine if she cannot get to her GP surgery.
Stuart Wilson says his mother Julia, from Sketty in Swansea, is immobile and needs two people with a hoist to get her up.
He says her surgery called on Tuesday offering a jab but they were told it would take time to arrange a house visit.1 -
I think it's very difficult to deal with home visits with the pfizer vaccine's requirements.Sandpit said:
Some GPs appear to be completely indifferent to vaccination, whereas others are completely on top of everyone. People who have mobility issues need to be top of the priority list.FrancisUrquhart said:A housebound 84-year-old woman says she has been told she may have to wait up to two months to have her coronavirus vaccine if she cannot get to her GP surgery.
Stuart Wilson says his mother Julia, from Sketty in Swansea, is immobile and needs two people with a hoist to get her up.
He says her surgery called on Tuesday offering a jab but they were told it would take time to arrange a house visit.1 -
Thanks for that - wasn't aware of that difference. But it's not exactly tactful at the moment.RobD said:
He's been treated the same was as any ambassador from a multinational grouping, like the UN or NATO.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/13521561664664985600 -
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.
0 -
Yes, the problem was the degree of integration. Unfortunately, we were given a take it or leave it choice, with the very strong likelihood the integration would continue further in future - perhaps under different administrations - and no-one felt they'd be asked again for decades. So we decided to leave it.Cyclefree said:
As @rcs1000 has explained a gazillion times, effective economic unity necessarily requires a degree of political unity. See, for instance, the Singke Market. It simply is not possible to have the sort of trading relationship there was in the Singke Market without some degree of political integration. The amount of such integration is the issue, of course.Mysticrose said:
Exactly.Richard_Tyndall said:
Actually that tweet is wrong. Britain consistently opposed the status of the EEAS as it is known and blocked it having full diplomatic status on organisations such as the UN and OSCE.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1352195106837770240Mysticrose said:I don't think the EU should have ambassadorial status and I don't think it's petty. For good or ill we did Brexit and we marked ourselves out as a nation state. We live with that and by that. The EU should be no exception.
If you believe in Brexit, which I didn't, then it's consistent and right.
I think it's consistent and right that following Brexit we take this decision. I hope Boris sticks to his guns on it, although I'm doubtful he will.
It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
I was a Remainer but the EU's worst trait has been its attempt to shift from economic unity to political unity. Vive la difference!
That is why the claim that we want only the trade and not the political stuff was nonsense. And why now - because we have decided against the political stuff - we are realising the cost to our trade.
I think our long-term "par" relationship across party lines would be a common market (with votes) with some regulatory flexibility at national level as well as EU level, free movement for temporary workers (not "citizens") and with caps if it gets really silly) and multilateral collaboration on political matters of mutual interest. But not legal, social, cultural, fiscal, or broader federal union.
The most silly example at the moment is the SPS rules (which other than the political argument of "cherrypicking" I can't understand why it can't be done on an equivalence and LPF basis, with extra checks in future if we diverge) because our fresh meat and fish is part of the same ecosystem and rules at present and no more dangerous or risky than it was on 31st December.1 -
Get the Army medics on this, alongside a national notline where people can report elderly and vulnerable who have slipped through the cracks.MaxPB said:
Yes, having vaccination teams door knocking is going to really get those last 30% of over 80s done quickly. It's also something that doesn't need to rely on local infrastructure.TOPPING said:
And as noted yesterday - they are also rolling out in-home vaccinations.FrancisUrquhart said:The UK is giving 200 vaccinations every minute, Health Secretary Matt Hancock says
He says the UK has now given more than five million doses of the vaccine to 4.6 million people.
It comes as 65 new vaccination centres are due to open in England today, including a mosque in Birmingham and a cinema in Aylesbury.1 -
NHS workers are getting the second dose, my wife has had hers and my daughter is having hers next week. I know of numerous other GP Surgeries whose staff have had both injections.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/13522100701725327360 -
Not only that but the EU knew that and knew it was the UK's status when the EU/UK negotiations were going on last year.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I have already said that is because he doesn't qualify for it under the 1964 law.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
If this is such a big deal for them I don't understand why Barnier didn't bring it up. I'm sure a passage on page 1,178 of the negotiations could have been added granting the EU diplomatic status as part of the agreement - and I doubt anyone would have cared about it at all.
Obviously this wasn't that big of a deal to Barnier. Seems to just be a fit by people with nothing better to complain about now, including from that source a "European Commission spokesman" who still seems to think the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty. Either can't be a very senior spokesman or the EU need better spokespeople.2 -
She has admitted this to the extent she has admitted the earlier meeting and accepted that she was told then. Should she then have seen Salmond in a private meeting? Possibly not according to the MInisterial code but these are people who were friends and worked together for 20 years who would inevitably be concerned about the possible damage to their common cause. I don't find it at all surprising they would want to talk through the implications.CarlottaVance said:
Isn't the issue that Sturgeon allegedly knew about the complaints before she told Holyrood she did and hence is in breach of the ministerial code - but the investigation isn't pursuing this?DavidL said:
The central charge, so far as I can make it out, is that Sturgeon met the former leader of the SNP at her Official residence without civil servants being present. That this was a crime so heinous that it had "parallels with Watergate" goes beyond hyperbole into hysteria.OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/jamesmatthewsky/status/1351927574130262022?s=20
https://twitter.com/jamesmatthewsky/status/1351927970613653509?s=20
https://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-faces-more-questions-over-alex-salmond-bullying-claims-after-internal-emails-leaked-121922670 -
Surely the time is ripe for a courtroom drama about smoked haddock magnates and their shenanigans, possibly even with a Brexit slant? My mouth’s watering already (though that may just be the thought of Smokies).DavidL said:
I thought that her poem made the points Biden was trying to make more sharply and better than he did but like Biden's effort it was too long.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
Biden's speech was also a touch too long - though probably necessary in the circumstances.
Rather than obsessing about busts, it's worth noting that he referenced Magna Carta in it, thus showing that he understands rather more about the origins of US law and democracy than those petty-minded politicians here worrying about busts. Perhaps the next time a Tory politician mentions Churchill's bust a US politician might remind him of Churchill's decision not to go to Roosevelt's funeral. That might shut them up.
It would be nice if British politicians had more regard for the principles of Magna Carta. The current government - and previous ones as well - have embarked on a deliberate policy of neglect and downgrading of our criminal justice system, with the inevitable consequences as reported a couple of days ago, and largely ignored. People are having to wait 3 - 4 years for trials.
Instead, we've reached the ludicrous Ruritanian position where court buildings which have been sold off are now being refurbished so that they can be used as courtrooms in legal dramas filmed by Netflix but not as actual real courtrooms for real trial involving real people in the U.K.
Utterly shameful.
And btw, if Netfix are making dramas in Arbroath Sheriff Court they are being awfully quiet about it.
People just don't seem to get that courts, like almost everything else, change over time and need far more IT and technical support than you can efficiently provide in grand Victorian buildings. The new, purpose built, Justice Centre (and it hurts just to write that) in Inverness is one of the only Sheriff Courts which can provide the video conferencing we were lamenting earlier today. Of course it looks sad and dreary compared with the old court which was in the Castle overlooking the river Ness but it is far more functional and efficient.
A point is going to come when a lot of relatively trivial crime is going to get dumped on the basis that it is just too old and the evidence is too stale. This is an inevitable consequence of the pandemic.0 -
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.0 -
As one would expect from someone in Mr L's position a careful and reasonable dissection of an article which, on the face of it seems to have been written in haste rather than 'inadvertently".DavidL said:
The article is here: https://sourcenews.scot/robin-mcalpine-nicola-sturgeon-this-is-a-matter-of-the-integrity-of-scotland-as-a-nation/OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:
At the risk of giving away my own position I am not a fan of independence, the SNP government or Nicola Sturgeon (I do acknowledge her skills as a politician). And yet that article is bordering on crap.
His statement: "It is worth adding that he was not acquitted because his actions were ‘dodgy’ yet failed to meet the threshold of criminality but because the jury believed his defence that none of them happened" is completely inconsistent with the brilliant jury speech by Gordon Jackson QC who acted for him and plainly has no basis in fact as the jury were not polled.
The claims that the Lord Advocate and Crown Office were involved in some nebulous but vast conspiracy are ridiculous. I have known, slightly, Alex Prentice QC who prosecuted for the Crown for more than 25 years. He is careful, measured and scrupulous. Pretending that there was not a case for Salmond to answer (which seems the starting point of this conspiracy) is delusional.
The central charge, so far as I can make it out, is that Sturgeon met the former leader of the SNP at her Official residence without civil servants being present. That this was a crime so heinous that it had "parallels with Watergate" goes beyond hyperbole into hysteria.
I am extremely uncomfortable with the way that our Civil Service no longer seems to see any distinction between the SNP as a party and the government. I really don't like how independence supporting placemen have filled the offices of Scotland's quangocracy and use their positions to promote their cause. We do have major problems with the functionality of our democracy. But I do not find it surprising that any organisation would have reservations about anyone so delusional representing that organisation's interests.
And I can well understand, and sympathise with, the concern expressed in the first two sentences of the last paragraph.1 -
This appears to be the key story to me.Richard_Nabavi said:
There is some quite encouraging data buried in the headline Israel figures:MaxPB said:
Deaths are a lagging indicator and not a good measure for vaccine effectiveness for a while because there are loads of cases in or entering the funnel right now.tlg86 said:
Lockdown. Definitely not the vaccine as deaths are still going up.CarlottaVance said:
According to preliminary results published last week from a study of 600,000 recipients of the Pfizer vaccine, of 4,500 Israelis who tested positive after receiving their first vaccine dose, 244 were admitted to hospital because of the coronavirus in the first week following the jab,.. In the second week after the jab, 124 people were taken to hospital, but after that only seven more people fell ill enough to stay in hospital.
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/covid-vaccine-israel-vaccination-roll-out-transmissibility-programme-palestine-834999?ITO=msn
That suggests to me a very high real-world efficacy in terms of serious cases, which are after all the most important from a personal protection point of view.
Just the sort of numbers we need to see and reflective of the trial data, which speaks to a fortnight latency before any immunity is achieved.
2 -
You can also make the point by arguing the counterfactual.Sean_F said:
I think one has to accept limits to free trade. Ultimately, there comes a point where the loss of self-government become more important than marginal boosts to GDP.Cyclefree said:
As @rcs1000 has explained a gazillion times, effective economic unity necessarily requires a degree of political unity. See, for instance, the Singke Market. It simply is not possible to have the sort of trading relationship there was in the Singke Market without some degree of political integration. The amount of such integration is the issue, of course.Mysticrose said:
Exactly.Richard_Tyndall said:
Actually that tweet is wrong. Britain consistently opposed the status of the EEAS as it is known and blocked it having full diplomatic status on organisations such as the UN and OSCE.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1352195106837770240Mysticrose said:I don't think the EU should have ambassadorial status and I don't think it's petty. For good or ill we did Brexit and we marked ourselves out as a nation state. We live with that and by that. The EU should be no exception.
If you believe in Brexit, which I didn't, then it's consistent and right.
I think it's consistent and right that following Brexit we take this decision. I hope Boris sticks to his guns on it, although I'm doubtful he will.
It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
I was a Remainer but the EU's worst trait has been its attempt to shift from economic unity to political unity. Vive la difference!
That is why the claim that we want only the trade and not the political stuff was nonsense. And why now - because we have decided against the political stuff - we are realising the cost to our trade.
World GDP, and British GDP, would increase even faster if we had global free movement, a world currency and pan-global regulatory union.
But, we wouldn't want to do that.1 -
Yes, a lot of the 4-5k daily leftovers are going on second jabs for NHS staff aiui, one of my cousins was able to get his done last night along with other front line staff working, there were around 100 or so leftovers that needed to be used to chucked so they just lined up all of the staff and got through them after closing time.NerysHughes said:
NHS workers are getting the second dose, my wife has had hers and my daughter is having hers next week. I know of numerous other GP Surgeries whose staff have had both injections.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/13522100701725327361 -
Sounds like EU cherry picking to me.Carnyx said:
Thanks for that - wasn't aware of that difference. But it's not exactly tactful at the moment.RobD said:
He's been treated the same was as any ambassador from a multinational grouping, like the UN or NATO.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/13521561664664985600 -
It is not a lack of understanding on the part of the UK. At least not on this point. Personally I would prefer the EFTA relationship and one of the reasons for that is that it does remove us from the Political integration. To say that you cannot be a member of the Single Market without political unity as you said is simply wrong. The EEA proves that. Which is of course the whole point of it.Cyclefree said:
There is a trade off between the two. Ie you can integrate to a certain extent on the economic level but the more economic integration you want and a say in how the rules are determined, the more involvement you will need in the bodies making those rules - either by being a member of those bodies or on those bodies in some other capacity.Richard_Tyndall said:
I would be interested to know how much political unity - by which we mean actual political attachment via legally binding institutions - you think there is between the EU and the EFTA members?Cyclefree said:
As @rcs1000 has explained a gazillion times, effective economic unity necessarily requires a degree of political unity. See, for instance, the Singke Market. It simply is not possible to have the sort of trading relationship there was in the Singke Market without some degree of political integration. The amount of such integration is the issue, of course.Mysticrose said:
Exactly.Richard_Tyndall said:
Actually that tweet is wrong. Britain consistently opposed the status of the EEAS as it is known and blocked it having full diplomatic status on organisations such as the UN and OSCE.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1352195106837770240Mysticrose said:I don't think the EU should have ambassadorial status and I don't think it's petty. For good or ill we did Brexit and we marked ourselves out as a nation state. We live with that and by that. The EU should be no exception.
If you believe in Brexit, which I didn't, then it's consistent and right.
I think it's consistent and right that following Brexit we take this decision. I hope Boris sticks to his guns on it, although I'm doubtful he will.
It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
I was a Remainer but the EU's worst trait has been its attempt to shift from economic unity to political unity. Vive la difference!
That is why the claim that we want only the trade and not the political stuff was nonsense. And why now - because we have decided against the political stuff - we are realising the cost to our trade.
This then raises the question of the democratic oversight of the bodies making those rules. Many of the rules in the financial sector, for instance, are made by expert bodies with little or no direct democratic oversight at all.
We can have quite a lot of economic/trade integration with the EU but at the cost of relatively little say in the decision-making over the rules and/or relatively little democratic oversight. Or not, as the case may be.
But my - perhaps simplistic - point is that trade, especially the more integrated it becomes necessarily involves political decisions and a degree of surrendering a certain freedom of manoeuvre in order to get other desirable things. Britain - with its history - should surely understand that.0 -
63% of care home residents had first jab....bit disappointing number.0
-
Cyclefree said:
You should. It does not matter what anyone calls themselves or thinks of themselves as. Words do not change biological reality. If people who are biologically male compete with women, then they will have a physical advantage which no amount of skill or training by women can overcome.kinabalu said:
Well if that's the view of what is surely the doughtiest fighter for women's rights on here, perhaps he is on the wrong track. Let me have another think about it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
Women's sporting competitions will be no more.
Indeed. Martina Navratilova did a superb documentary for the BBC (?) on this, well worth digging out if you can.
She pointed out that she was at the very top in terms of testosterone for a woman, and that a transwoman even after prolonged hormone treatment had higher levels by an order of magnitude.
Not a level playing field, far from it.2 -
Oh yes, and don't forget the potted hough either. Personally, I want the role of the Kipper, an oily fish that gets cut down the middle!Theuniondivvie said:
Surely the time is ripe for a courtroom drama about smoked haddock magnates and their shenanigans, possibly even with a Brexit slant? My mouth’s watering already (though that may just be the thought of Smokies).DavidL said:
I thought that her poem made the points Biden was trying to make more sharply and better than he did but like Biden's effort it was too long.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
Biden's speech was also a touch too long - though probably necessary in the circumstances.
Rather than obsessing about busts, it's worth noting that he referenced Magna Carta in it, thus showing that he understands rather more about the origins of US law and democracy than those petty-minded politicians here worrying about busts. Perhaps the next time a Tory politician mentions Churchill's bust a US politician might remind him of Churchill's decision not to go to Roosevelt's funeral. That might shut them up.
It would be nice if British politicians had more regard for the principles of Magna Carta. The current government - and previous ones as well - have embarked on a deliberate policy of neglect and downgrading of our criminal justice system, with the inevitable consequences as reported a couple of days ago, and largely ignored. People are having to wait 3 - 4 years for trials.
Instead, we've reached the ludicrous Ruritanian position where court buildings which have been sold off are now being refurbished so that they can be used as courtrooms in legal dramas filmed by Netflix but not as actual real courtrooms for real trial involving real people in the U.K.
Utterly shameful.
And btw, if Netfix are making dramas in Arbroath Sheriff Court they are being awfully quiet about it.
People just don't seem to get that courts, like almost everything else, change over time and need far more IT and technical support than you can efficiently provide in grand Victorian buildings. The new, purpose built, Justice Centre (and it hurts just to write that) in Inverness is one of the only Sheriff Courts which can provide the video conferencing we were lamenting earlier today. Of course it looks sad and dreary compared with the old court which was in the Castle overlooking the river Ness but it is far more functional and efficient.
A point is going to come when a lot of relatively trivial crime is going to get dumped on the basis that it is just too old and the evidence is too stale. This is an inevitable consequence of the pandemic.0 -
The Royal Navy contribution at Okinawa was significant.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.
The Commonwealth Corps allocated to invading the Tokyo plain felt rather more token.0 -
I did not intimate your sympathies lie with the EDL or neo-fascists. I don't think they do for a moment - quite the opposite, actually. I was merely saying that Biden should not pander so such people in the USA when seeking to unite the nation. It wasn't about you. At all.Casino_Royale said:
With respect, I won't take any lectures on being patronising from someone who tells me my priorities are all wrong because I'm addressing a difficult issue and intimates my sympathies must lie with the EDL or neo-fascists as a result.Northern_Al said:
Wow, what a patronising, and ironic, last sentence.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, I watched yesterday. I thought it was an acceptable speech, but not an especially historically memorable one; it just looks like that right now because everyone is so relieved he's not Trump.Northern_Al said:
I think you've been wholly captured by anti-wokeism. Did you watch yesterday? Lots of humility and decency on show, and a good celebration of modern, diverse USA. Biden will do what he says, and govern for all decent Americans. But yes, he won't pander to the EDL equivalents or neo-fascists of the far right. Because they're not decent.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Like our government, you're obsessed by symbols/statues. But it's not substance. Let me give you an example. While Jenrick puts forward legislation on statues, he does sweet FA to tackle real issues of substance, For example, tens of thousands of people are trapped in buildings with cladding that needs removing; they can't sell, and many face huge bills. Following Grenfell, how much progress has been made in resolving this? Not a lot.
Your priorities are all wrong.
Your comparison is an entirely false one. Opposition to "Wokeism" ≠ support for the EDL or neo-fascists, and it's offensive to say it does. I explored the difference on here last night - you should read what I said.
Governments, can and do, enact hundreds of policies across dozens of policy areas all at once, and are both capable of doing so and expected to do it. As it happens, I think the Government should make the relief of leaseholders trapped in flats by poor cladding a high priority and get it fixed with a Government guarantee. However, I also think he should address politically-motivated cultural desecration as well. What people mean by "he's got his priorities all wrong" is "we'd prefer if he didn't address this issue" There's no reason Robert Paden Powell, Redvers Buller, Oliver Cromwell, or Admiral Nelson, should be removed without due democratic process just so councillors can signal their virtue and appease their fanatical base. This was a gap in the law and urgently needed addressing before many more irrevocably came down.
My priorities are not wrong. I also want a united, less divided society. Symbols matter, and rather than negatively tearing things down and dividing people we should be adding to them with new symbols that say things about us today, and celebrate the best of us.
Your blindness to how both sides are aggravating it at present with their language and action is a huge part of the problem.
You'd be well-advised to be more reflective and balanced in your posts on the matter, in future.0 -
Is there a source for that 4-5k numbers, @MaxPB .MaxPB said:
Yes, a lot of the 4-5k daily leftovers are going on second jabs for NHS staff aiui, one of my cousins was able to get his done last night along with other front line staff working, there were around 100 or so leftovers that needed to be used to chucked so they just lined up all of the staff and got through them after closing time.NerysHughes said:
NHS workers are getting the second dose, my wife has had hers and my daughter is having hers next week. I know of numerous other GP Surgeries whose staff have had both injections.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1352210070172532736
Not doubting - interested.0 -
Above 80% in Scotland. But that reflects different priorities and approaches. Partly cos of opposition demands, I believe.FrancisUrquhart said:63% of care home residents had first jab....bit disappointing number.
0 -
Fantastic news if true. Does match with the Pfizer trial data too.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1352210070172532736
An interesting thing that I don't think I've seen anyone mention but from the Pfizer trial data there was no immune response in days 1-7 from initial injection, it takes time between injection happening and the immune response beginning . . . but there was an immediate 90% immune response from days 1-7 after the second injection.
Now logically either the second injection is having an immediate and dramatic response despite not really having had time to work yet . . . or the 90% protection seen in days 22-28 was from the initial injection having had 21 days to work and the second injection wasn't very relevant in those days.
If one dose is 90% and the second dose gives an extra 5% then the UK is most definitely doing the right thing and will save tens of thousands of lives from its rollout. Hundreds of thousands globally if it gets copied.3 -
By which you mean that there isn't a UN or NATO ambassador to the UK? But then, we're members of both the UN and NATO.RobD said:
He's been treated the same was as any ambassador from a multinational grouping, like the UN or NATO.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/13521561664664985600 -
Which is where mobile vaccination teams come into play. The last 30-40% is going to be much harder to reach than the first 60% of each of the currently targeted groups.FrancisUrquhart said:63% of care home residents had first jab....bit disappointing number.
0 -
Yes, or in fact a bit faster than a fortnight, given that you need to factor in a few days from infection to hospitalisation.Anabobazina said:This appears to be the key story to me.
Just the sort of numbers we need to see and reflective of the trial data, which speaks to a fortnight latency before any immunity is achieved.1 -
Or left raw fish behind the radiators?FrancisUrquhart said:I wonder if Trump has half inched anything from the White House on his way out the door?
0 -
There's no shame in needing to have the subtexts and allusions in poetry explained to you. Often it is of a particular time and place and you couldn't be expected to know what it's about. But far from putting you off, I'd hope that this would encourage you on; the hard-won perspectives are often the most valuable.Casino_Royale said:
I know you think I'm a philistine on this but I really struggle with most poetry. I usually need to have it explained to me to appreciate it, with some rare exceptions, and even then I'm sometimes a bit meh. Maybe that's because I'm an engineer and deal in logical statements!Cyclefree said:
I listen to and recite poetry to myself quite a lot. It is something I've done since childhood. I listened to it and found it really hard to listen to. It just became words washing over me. It felt like a speech rather than a poem.Richard_Nabavi said:
Interesting. Despite the fact that I'm a fully signed-up old fogey, I thought it was rather good, with some parts very good. It was a bit too long, but there were some truly striking phrases, such as 'a nation that isn’t broken, but simply unfinished'.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
...
Stylistically, it was clearly based on rap, with soft, falling rhymes and pseudo-rhymes:
It’s because being American is more than a pride we inherit.
It’s the past we step into and how we repair it.
We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it.
Would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy.
OK, it was perhaps a bit on the mawkish side, but no more than so than many celebratory poems written for ceremonial occasions, including the vast bulk of the official output of our own Poet Laureates since time immemorial.
Poems - to me - especially when well spoken force you to really listen, really focus. Whereas this quickly became background noise to me.
But it's very personal I accept.
John Betjeman I enjoyed, chiefly because I could relate to the subject matter, and found his poems rather amusing.
Some of the WW1 poetry has stayed with me too. But it's too dark and disturbing for me to want to re-read regularly.
I do think that you are one of those on here most prone to absolutist thinking, which is always a risk when someone is too focused on facts, equations, physics. Literature can help, and a decent place to start would be Hard Times by Dickens, along with a detailed commentary about the themes Dickens is exploring in that book. It took me a few goes to get it, and I'm really no fan of Dickens' style, but it's worth it.0 -
Can we? If we can then I agree completely. Agree with your point on parallel processing. But do we have the extra manpower resources who can vaccinate. I have no idea if that is the case or not. Having said that my wife could I guess and there has been no call for medics in pharma companies to help out as far as I know (last winter the medics in her firm were asking about volunteering and being released, but weren't needed.)MaxPB said:
But that's an issue of manpower which we can throw bodies at. Hiring an extra few teams to knock on doors doesn't preclude opening more vaccination centres. As k said yesterday, it's like having a multicore processor vs a single core one. You run as many threads in parallel as feasible and door knocking will be the difference between getting to 70-80% of immobile groups jabbed and 95-100% done.kjh said:
It does depend though whether it is supply or manpower that is on your critical path. It is likely to be a 10 fold difference in numbers done, but if the person doing it is not doing vaccinations in a centre then it is a no brainer.MaxPB said:
Yes, having vaccination teams door knocking is going to really get those last 30% of over 80s done quickly. It's also something that doesn't need to rely on local infrastructure.TOPPING said:
And as noted yesterday - they are also rolling out in-home vaccinations.FrancisUrquhart said:The UK is giving 200 vaccinations every minute, Health Secretary Matt Hancock says
He says the UK has now given more than five million doses of the vaccine to 4.6 million people.
It comes as 65 new vaccination centres are due to open in England today, including a mosque in Birmingham and a cinema in Aylesbury.0 -
Imo athletics seems to have got to a sensible conclusion. Using scientific analysis they have allowed trans athletes to compete naturally against women in the events where the differences in performance are very small but said they cant compete naturally against women in others, particularly middle distance.Philip_Thompson said:
How do you propose to resolve the sport issue?kinabalu said:
This is a real issue but to say that Biden has "unilaterally eviscerated womens sports and placed a new glass ceiling on girls" is indicative of someone not too interested in resolving it.Casino_Royale said:
Thanks Scott. Refreshing to agree with you again on something.Scott_xP said:While the Biden Presidency will be about returning to sanity in most respects, it is "woke" and will do dumb shit like this
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
How does a biological woman compete with a biological man on a "level playing field"?
And if its so easy to do, why do we have women's sport and men's sport, why don't we just merge them and call it sport and have all women and men competing equally?
A pragmatic if messy approach, but not starting from the dogmatic positions of either "side" of the debate.0 -
From the the government dashboard, there's between 4-5k second jabs being done per day. Anecdotally I can see NHS staff getting second jabs and they would always be the easiest group to receive them.MattW said:
Is there a source for that 4-5k numbers, @MaxPB .MaxPB said:
Yes, a lot of the 4-5k daily leftovers are going on second jabs for NHS staff aiui, one of my cousins was able to get his done last night along with other front line staff working, there were around 100 or so leftovers that needed to be used to chucked so they just lined up all of the staff and got through them after closing time.NerysHughes said:
NHS workers are getting the second dose, my wife has had hers and my daughter is having hers next week. I know of numerous other GP Surgeries whose staff have had both injections.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1352210070172532736
Not doubting - interested.0 -
Apologies, I was going off Carnyx' comment about the UK having UN and NATO ambassadors. The wiki list suggests there are a couple of international organizations that maintain a mission, including the UN and World Bank:jamesdoyle said:
By which you mean that there isn't a UN or NATO ambassador to the UK? But then, we're members of both the UN and NATO.RobD said:
He's been treated the same was as any ambassador from a multinational grouping, like the UN or NATO.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_in_the_United_Kingdom
In any case, the BBC article is quite clear the reasoning behind it;
"It is understood not to want to set a precedent by treating an international body in the same way as a nation state."1 -
Not only that but the transwoman will have had major physical advantages from before the hormone treatment even began. This how dope cheats get an advantage - they build up muscles by doping in advance, then ensure their blood is clean by the time they compete but still have the advantages. Building muscle is dramatically harder to do than maintaining it. That is why anti-doping regimes entail testing outside of competitions and not just on the day of competitions.Anabobazina said:Cyclefree said:
You should. It does not matter what anyone calls themselves or thinks of themselves as. Words do not change biological reality. If people who are biologically male compete with women, then they will have a physical advantage which no amount of skill or training by women can overcome.kinabalu said:
Well if that's the view of what is surely the doughtiest fighter for women's rights on here, perhaps he is on the wrong track. Let me have another think about it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
Women's sporting competitions will be no more.
Indeed. Martina Navratilova did a superb documentary for the BBC (?) on this, well worth digging out if you can.
She pointed out that she was at the very top in terms of testosterone for a woman, and that a transwoman even after prolonged hormone treatment had higher levels by an order of magnitude.
Not a level playing field, far from it.
I have no qualms with an athlete like olympic gold medalist Bruce Jenner becoming Caitlyn Jenner, if that is how she wants to live her life then that is OK with me.
I do have an issue with a modern Bruce becoming a modern Caitlyn and then competing in women's competitions. It isn't fair.4 -
The concerns expressed in those sentences may have some validity but the situation is really a consequence of a party being in overall power for a longish period rather than any hegemonic plot. It was thus when Labour controlled Scotland for decades and before them controlled by a largely Tory and Unionist establishment. It probably doesn’t help that opposition parties are utterly resistant to working with the SNP and that they’re a bit crap, but those are other stories.OldKingCole said:
As one would expect from someone in Mr L's position a careful and reasonable dissection of an article which, on the face of it seems to have been written in haste rather than 'inadvertently".DavidL said:
The article is here: https://sourcenews.scot/robin-mcalpine-nicola-sturgeon-this-is-a-matter-of-the-integrity-of-scotland-as-a-nation/OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:
At the risk of giving away my own position I am not a fan of independence, the SNP government or Nicola Sturgeon (I do acknowledge her skills as a politician). And yet that article is bordering on crap.
His statement: "It is worth adding that he was not acquitted because his actions were ‘dodgy’ yet failed to meet the threshold of criminality but because the jury believed his defence that none of them happened" is completely inconsistent with the brilliant jury speech by Gordon Jackson QC who acted for him and plainly has no basis in fact as the jury were not polled.
The claims that the Lord Advocate and Crown Office were involved in some nebulous but vast conspiracy are ridiculous. I have known, slightly, Alex Prentice QC who prosecuted for the Crown for more than 25 years. He is careful, measured and scrupulous. Pretending that there was not a case for Salmond to answer (which seems the starting point of this conspiracy) is delusional.
The central charge, so far as I can make it out, is that Sturgeon met the former leader of the SNP at her Official residence without civil servants being present. That this was a crime so heinous that it had "parallels with Watergate" goes beyond hyperbole into hysteria.
I am extremely uncomfortable with the way that our Civil Service no longer seems to see any distinction between the SNP as a party and the government. I really don't like how independence supporting placemen have filled the offices of Scotland's quangocracy and use their positions to promote their cause. We do have major problems with the functionality of our democracy. But I do not find it surprising that any organisation would have reservations about anyone so delusional representing that organisation's interests.
And I can well understand, and sympathise with, the concern expressed in the first two sentences of the last paragraph.0 -
You can't say Gaia's not trying but the infestation is persistent and adaptive. So far homo sapiens has retained the upper hand.FrancisUrquhart said:On FFS....
FIREFIGHTERS are battling to save a factory producing the Oxford Covid vaccine in North Wales from flooding caused by Storm Christoph. Emergency services raced to Wrexham Industrial Estate last night to protect the jab - as 2,000 homes across England were evacuated following torrential rainfall overnight.5 -
I saw this recently: a set of eye-witness accounts of kamikaze attacks on an RN aircraft carrier. It turns out having an armoured flight deck can be quite useful...Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.0 -
I think that's a fair summary of the "par" attitude - I'd be in favour of full union (and ultimately of world government in perhaps 100 years) but accept that it's a position on one extreme. I think the Brexit rhetoric has made the EU feel they need to err on the side of caution with "equivalence", since there seems to be an element of UK thinking that actively wants divergence ("otherwise why bother with Brexit"), and proving harm is a tedious, fractious and difficult process. If the onus on the "diverger" was to get acceptance that it wasn't causing any harm, that would be uncontroversial.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, the problem was the degree of integration. Unfortunately, we were given a take it or leave it choice, with the very strong likelihood the integration would continue further in future - perhaps under different administrations - and no-one felt they'd be asked again for decades. So we decided to leave it.Cyclefree said:
As @rcs1000 has explained a gazillion times, effective economic unity necessarily requires a degree of political unity. See, for instance, the Singke Market. It simply is not possible to have the sort of trading relationship there was in the Singke Market without some degree of political integration. The amount of such integration is the issue, of course.Mysticrose said:
Exactly.Richard_Tyndall said:
Actually that tweet is wrong. Britain consistently opposed the status of the EEAS as it is known and blocked it having full diplomatic status on organisations such as the UN and OSCE.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1352195106837770240Mysticrose said:I don't think the EU should have ambassadorial status and I don't think it's petty. For good or ill we did Brexit and we marked ourselves out as a nation state. We live with that and by that. The EU should be no exception.
If you believe in Brexit, which I didn't, then it's consistent and right.
I think it's consistent and right that following Brexit we take this decision. I hope Boris sticks to his guns on it, although I'm doubtful he will.
It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
I was a Remainer but the EU's worst trait has been its attempt to shift from economic unity to political unity. Vive la difference!
That is why the claim that we want only the trade and not the political stuff was nonsense. And why now - because we have decided against the political stuff - we are realising the cost to our trade.
I think our long-term "par" relationship across party lines would be a common market (with votes) with some regulatory flexibility at national level as well as EU level, free movement for temporary workers (not "citizens") and with caps if it gets really silly) and multilateral collaboration on political matters of mutual interest. But not legal, social, cultural, fiscal, or broader federal union.
The most silly example at the moment is the SPS rules (which other than the political argument of "cherrypicking" I can't understand why it can't be done on an equivalence and LPF basis, with extra checks in future if we diverge) because our fresh meat and fish is part of the same ecosystem and rules at present and no more dangerous or risky than it was on 31st December.
To give a concrete example in my area of interest: the EU is phasing out the practice of dosing all animals in a herd with antibiotics in case overcrowding might cause an infection to rip through the herd (because mass use of antibiotics leaks through to humans and increases the risk of antibiotic resistance). Britain is umming and ahing about dfoing the same and probably won't. Will that divergence cause harm to the EU? Hard to prove until there's actually example of antibiotic resistance spreading as a result. But it's understandable that they are worried about it.2 -
Churchill's bust?FrancisUrquhart said:I wonder if Trump has half inched anything from the White House on his way out the door?
2 -
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations#card-people_who_have_received_vaccinations_by_report_date_dailyMattW said:
Is there a source for that 4-5k numbers, @MaxPB .MaxPB said:
Yes, a lot of the 4-5k daily leftovers are going on second jabs for NHS staff aiui, one of my cousins was able to get his done last night along with other front line staff working, there were around 100 or so leftovers that needed to be used to chucked so they just lined up all of the staff and got through them after closing time.NerysHughes said:
NHS workers are getting the second dose, my wife has had hers and my daughter is having hers next week. I know of numerous other GP Surgeries whose staff have had both injections.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1352210070172532736
Not doubting - interested.
select 2nd dose daily.
I presume that what is happening is that, as before, they are giving spare vaccinations to NHS staff. If they have had their first jab more than 21 days ago, then they get their second.1 -
Yeah I think we can, aiui the government has been training over 100k vaccine jabbers for the AZ vaccine so there will an excess of bodies we can throw at the problem. What we will struggle with for another month or so is supply. I think we're limited to around 3-3.5m doses per week for the next month.kjh said:
Can we? If we can then I agree completely. Agree with your point on parallel processing. But do we have the extra manpower resources who can vaccinate. I have no idea if that is the case or not. Having said that my wife could I guess and there has been no call for medics in pharma companies to help out as far as I know (last winter the medics in her firm were asking about volunteering and being released, but weren't needed.)MaxPB said:
But that's an issue of manpower which we can throw bodies at. Hiring an extra few teams to knock on doors doesn't preclude opening more vaccination centres. As k said yesterday, it's like having a multicore processor vs a single core one. You run as many threads in parallel as feasible and door knocking will be the difference between getting to 70-80% of immobile groups jabbed and 95-100% done.kjh said:
It does depend though whether it is supply or manpower that is on your critical path. It is likely to be a 10 fold difference in numbers done, but if the person doing it is not doing vaccinations in a centre then it is a no brainer.MaxPB said:
Yes, having vaccination teams door knocking is going to really get those last 30% of over 80s done quickly. It's also something that doesn't need to rely on local infrastructure.TOPPING said:
And as noted yesterday - they are also rolling out in-home vaccinations.FrancisUrquhart said:The UK is giving 200 vaccinations every minute, Health Secretary Matt Hancock says
He says the UK has now given more than five million doses of the vaccine to 4.6 million people.
It comes as 65 new vaccination centres are due to open in England today, including a mosque in Birmingham and a cinema in Aylesbury.0 -
Season 2, The Forfar Bridie Intervention.DavidL said:
Oh yes, and don't forget the potted hough either. Personally, I want the role of the Kipper, an oily fish that gets cut down the middle!Theuniondivvie said:
Surely the time is ripe for a courtroom drama about smoked haddock magnates and their shenanigans, possibly even with a Brexit slant? My mouth’s watering already (though that may just be the thought of Smokies).DavidL said:
I thought that her poem made the points Biden was trying to make more sharply and better than he did but like Biden's effort it was too long.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
Biden's speech was also a touch too long - though probably necessary in the circumstances.
Rather than obsessing about busts, it's worth noting that he referenced Magna Carta in it, thus showing that he understands rather more about the origins of US law and democracy than those petty-minded politicians here worrying about busts. Perhaps the next time a Tory politician mentions Churchill's bust a US politician might remind him of Churchill's decision not to go to Roosevelt's funeral. That might shut them up.
It would be nice if British politicians had more regard for the principles of Magna Carta. The current government - and previous ones as well - have embarked on a deliberate policy of neglect and downgrading of our criminal justice system, with the inevitable consequences as reported a couple of days ago, and largely ignored. People are having to wait 3 - 4 years for trials.
Instead, we've reached the ludicrous Ruritanian position where court buildings which have been sold off are now being refurbished so that they can be used as courtrooms in legal dramas filmed by Netflix but not as actual real courtrooms for real trial involving real people in the U.K.
Utterly shameful.
And btw, if Netfix are making dramas in Arbroath Sheriff Court they are being awfully quiet about it.
People just don't seem to get that courts, like almost everything else, change over time and need far more IT and technical support than you can efficiently provide in grand Victorian buildings. The new, purpose built, Justice Centre (and it hurts just to write that) in Inverness is one of the only Sheriff Courts which can provide the video conferencing we were lamenting earlier today. Of course it looks sad and dreary compared with the old court which was in the Castle overlooking the river Ness but it is far more functional and efficient.
A point is going to come when a lot of relatively trivial crime is going to get dumped on the basis that it is just too old and the evidence is too stale. This is an inevitable consequence of the pandemic.2 -
I don't think I've seen anyone spelling it out in words, but a few graphs have been put on here showing an elbow shape in the detected infections after about a week; the placebo groups continue in a straight line, and the therapeutic groups show a sharp bend towards flat.Philip_Thompson said:
Fantastic news if true. Does match with the Pfizer trial data too.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1352210070172532736
An interesting thing that I don't think I've seen anyone mention but from the Pfizer trial data there was no immune response in days 1-7 from initial injection, it takes time between injection happening and the immune response beginning . . . but there was an immediate 90% immune response from days 1-7 after the second injection.
Now logically either the second injection is having an immediate and dramatic response despite not really having had time to work yet . . . or the 90% protection seen in days 22-28 was from the initial injection having had 21 days to work and the second injection wasn't very relevant in those days.
If one dose is 90% and the second dose gives an extra 5% then the UK is most definitely doing the right thing and will save tens of thousands of lives from its rollout. Hundreds of thousands globally if it gets copied.2 -
I know leftover vaccine has been given to volunteer marshals so it makes sense. I mean why waste it?MaxPB said:
Yes, a lot of the 4-5k daily leftovers are going on second jabs for NHS staff aiui, one of my cousins was able to get his done last night along with other front line staff working, there were around 100 or so leftovers that needed to be used to chucked so they just lined up all of the staff and got through them after closing time.NerysHughes said:
NHS workers are getting the second dose, my wife has had hers and my daughter is having hers next week. I know of numerous other GP Surgeries whose staff have had both injections.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/13522100701725327360 -
I would add The Marshall Plan, NATO and the UN as well. Oh and the Berlin Airlift.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.0 -
I agree.Richard_Nabavi said:
Interesting. Despite the fact that I'm a fully signed-up old fogey, I thought it was rather good, with some parts very good. It was a bit too long, but there were some truly striking phrases, such as 'a nation that isn’t broken, but simply unfinished'.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
...
Stylistically, it was clearly based on rap, with soft, falling rhymes and pseudo-rhymes:
It’s because being American is more than a pride we inherit.
It’s the past we step into and how we repair it.
We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it.
Would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy.
OK, it was perhaps a bit on the mawkish side, but no more than so than many celebratory poems written for ceremonial occasions, including the vast bulk of the official output of our own Poet Laureates since time immemorial.
it's not entirely to my taste, either, but I am something of a convert to the poetic rhythms of rap. In style, it owes something to Hamilton (which it directly references a couple of times).
A pretty impressive effort from a 22 year old. Who apparently has presidential ambitions of her own.0 -
-
I presume we will be in for another round of who did Joe phone first...0
-
1
-
There is an issue but hyperbole does not help. Trans athletes have competed in womens sport since the start of womens sport, yet womens sport miraculously does exist and has actually flourished in the last couple of decades.Cyclefree said:
You should. It does not matter what anyone calls themselves or thinks of themselves as. Words do not change biological reality. If people who are biologically male compete with women, then they will have a physical advantage which no amount of skill or training by women can overcome.kinabalu said:
Well if that's the view of what is surely the doughtiest fighter for women's rights on here, perhaps he is on the wrong track. Let me have another think about it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
Women's sporting competitions will be no more.
Address it on a sport by sport, case by case basis. Middle distance athletics was clearly dominated by trans athletes so the rules were changed. They continue to do scientific research to see if the rules should be strengthened or relaxed, not from an ideological basis but a scientific one. Well done them.3 -
And now with the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u57eMtz-PAE&t=1139sFysics_Teacher said:
I saw this recently: a set of eye-witness accounts of kamikaze attacks on an RN aircraft carrier. It turns out having an armoured flight deck can be quite useful...Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.0 -
Being "anti woke" does not equate to far right leanings, I agree with that, although I'd imagine almost all far righters are that way inclined. SOTBO, I suppose. But for me, the big bugbear is false equivalence between where Trump has taken the Republican Party and where the Democrats are. I don't see it and the reason I don't see it is it isn't there. Therefore if someone does see it, it makes me question what lens they're using.Northern_Al said:
I did not intimate your sympathies lie with the EDL or neo-fascists. I don't think they do for a moment - quite the opposite, actually. I was merely saying that Biden should not pander so such people in the USA when seeking to unite the nation. It wasn't about you. At all.Casino_Royale said:
With respect, I won't take any lectures on being patronising from someone who tells me my priorities are all wrong because I'm addressing a difficult issue and intimates my sympathies must lie with the EDL or neo-fascists as a result.Northern_Al said:
Wow, what a patronising, and ironic, last sentence.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, I watched yesterday. I thought it was an acceptable speech, but not an especially historically memorable one; it just looks like that right now because everyone is so relieved he's not Trump.Northern_Al said:
I think you've been wholly captured by anti-wokeism. Did you watch yesterday? Lots of humility and decency on show, and a good celebration of modern, diverse USA. Biden will do what he says, and govern for all decent Americans. But yes, he won't pander to the EDL equivalents or neo-fascists of the far right. Because they're not decent.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Like our government, you're obsessed by symbols/statues. But it's not substance. Let me give you an example. While Jenrick puts forward legislation on statues, he does sweet FA to tackle real issues of substance, For example, tens of thousands of people are trapped in buildings with cladding that needs removing; they can't sell, and many face huge bills. Following Grenfell, how much progress has been made in resolving this? Not a lot.
Your priorities are all wrong.
Your comparison is an entirely false one. Opposition to "Wokeism" ≠ support for the EDL or neo-fascists, and it's offensive to say it does. I explored the difference on here last night - you should read what I said.
Governments, can and do, enact hundreds of policies across dozens of policy areas all at once, and are both capable of doing so and expected to do it. As it happens, I think the Government should make the relief of leaseholders trapped in flats by poor cladding a high priority and get it fixed with a Government guarantee. However, I also think he should address politically-motivated cultural desecration as well. What people mean by "he's got his priorities all wrong" is "we'd prefer if he didn't address this issue" There's no reason Robert Paden Powell, Redvers Buller, Oliver Cromwell, or Admiral Nelson, should be removed without due democratic process just so councillors can signal their virtue and appease their fanatical base. This was a gap in the law and urgently needed addressing before many more irrevocably came down.
My priorities are not wrong. I also want a united, less divided society. Symbols matter, and rather than negatively tearing things down and dividing people we should be adding to them with new symbols that say things about us today, and celebrate the best of us.
Your blindness to how both sides are aggravating it at present with their language and action is a huge part of the problem.
You'd be well-advised to be more reflective and balanced in your posts on the matter, in future.1 -
Dumb post. There's two new circle that needs drawing in that venn diagram, with our trade agreements with the EU and the EFTA. 🙄Scott_xP said:1 -
Is the Government message this week still STAY AT HOME !!! ?
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/13522212087004528640 -
But we have, and want to continue having, an ambassador to the EU. And, while our ambassadors to the UN and NATO are actually delegates who have ambassadorial status, our ambassador to the EU is actually an ambassador. So some asymmetric, and rather tortured, reasoning on the part f the UK Government which, like a lot of its policy re the EU, seems designed really for a short term PR gain at the cost of long term benefit.RobD said:
Apologies, I was going off Carnyx' comment about the UK having UN and NATO ambassadors. The wiki list suggests there are a couple of international organizations that maintain a mission, including the UN and World Bank:jamesdoyle said:
By which you mean that there isn't a UN or NATO ambassador to the UK? But then, we're members of both the UN and NATO.RobD said:
He's been treated the same was as any ambassador from a multinational grouping, like the UN or NATO.Carnyx said:
But he's not being treated/functioning as one.RobD said:
The EU does have an ambassador to the UK, João Vale de Almeida.Carnyx said:
Sorry - should have typed one from the EU. But the logic stands.RobD said:
But the UK does have an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow.Carnyx said:
What I don't understand is if we have ambassadors to the UN and NATO as well as their member states, they wny not EU? The conclusion is that not to have one for the EU is merely petty spite and wrecks relationships further in the interests of making Brexiters feel less awful about themselves.Scott_xP said:
We are the only Country to do this.Mysticrose said:It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
Start as we mean to go on, as an International outlier, a denier of reality, obstinate and untrustworthy.
Brexit in a nutshell.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_in_the_United_Kingdom
In any case, the BBC article is quite clear the reasoning behind it;
"It is understood not to want to set a precedent by treating an international body in the same way as a nation state."0 -
Or the CTA.Philip_Thompson said:
Dumb post. There's two new circle that needs drawing in that venn diagram, with our trade agreements with the EU and the EFTA. 🙄Scott_xP said:1 -
Thanks. To be honest, I'm not a big fan of fiction either. I like to read history, politics, biographies, reports, analysis and manuals.Mary_Batty said:
There's no shame in needing to have the subtexts and allusions in poetry explained to you. Often it is of a particular time and place and you couldn't be expected to know what it's about. But far from putting you off, I'd hope that this would encourage you on; the hard-won perspectives are often the most valuable.Casino_Royale said:
I know you think I'm a philistine on this but I really struggle with most poetry. I usually need to have it explained to me to appreciate it, with some rare exceptions, and even then I'm sometimes a bit meh. Maybe that's because I'm an engineer and deal in logical statements!Cyclefree said:
I listen to and recite poetry to myself quite a lot. It is something I've done since childhood. I listened to it and found it really hard to listen to. It just became words washing over me. It felt like a speech rather than a poem.Richard_Nabavi said:
Interesting. Despite the fact that I'm a fully signed-up old fogey, I thought it was rather good, with some parts very good. It was a bit too long, but there were some truly striking phrases, such as 'a nation that isn’t broken, but simply unfinished'.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
...
Stylistically, it was clearly based on rap, with soft, falling rhymes and pseudo-rhymes:
It’s because being American is more than a pride we inherit.
It’s the past we step into and how we repair it.
We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it.
Would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy.
OK, it was perhaps a bit on the mawkish side, but no more than so than many celebratory poems written for ceremonial occasions, including the vast bulk of the official output of our own Poet Laureates since time immemorial.
Poems - to me - especially when well spoken force you to really listen, really focus. Whereas this quickly became background noise to me.
But it's very personal I accept.
John Betjeman I enjoyed, chiefly because I could relate to the subject matter, and found his poems rather amusing.
Some of the WW1 poetry has stayed with me too. But it's too dark and disturbing for me to want to re-read regularly.
I do think that you are one of those on here most prone to absolutist thinking, which is always a risk when someone is too focused on facts, equations, physics. Literature can help, and a decent place to start would be Hard Times by Dickens, along with a detailed commentary about the themes Dickens is exploring in that book. It took me a few goes to get it, and I'm really no fan of Dickens' style, but it's worth it.
It's probably more accurate to say I have a utilitarian approach to reading for pleasure. If I'm going to invest the time in doing it, I want to get something (broader knowledge) out of it.0 -
https://twitter.com/paulbsinclair/status/1351848554881568770?s=20DavidL said:
I really don't like how independence supporting placemen have filled the offices of Scotland's quangocracy and use their positions to promote their cause.OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:1 -
I read Barbara Tuchman's biography of him some years ago now and it rather changed my views. Yes there was some distinctly dodgy stuff, especially around the time he was a judge and there was corruption very close to him whilst in office but he achieved a remarkable amount and generally made the right calls.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.1 -
There is whole argument about that within the naval historian community - some hold that while the armoured flight decks were useful for reducing the effects of smaller hits, the box girder they created could distort easily as a result of fire - doing massive (but less obvious) damage to the carrier.Fysics_Teacher said:
And now with the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u57eMtz-PAE&t=1139sFysics_Teacher said:
I saw this recently: a set of eye-witness accounts of kamikaze attacks on an RN aircraft carrier. It turns out having an armoured flight deck can be quite useful...Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.0 -
The Prime Minister shouldn't visit flooded areas now?Scott_xP said:Is the Government message this week still STAY AT HOME !!! ?
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1352221208700452864
You really are a prat.3 -
Oh goodie we are back to this nonsense....why is Boris at a vaccination centre, why is he visiting flood damaged areas....cos he is the sodding Prime Minister....i notice no criticism of Starmer for doing the same.Scott_xP said:Is the Government message this week still STAY AT HOME !!! ?
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1352221208700452864
As soon as he doesn't appear in public for 2 days, you post tweets saying lazy Boris not on the job.6 -
Thanks. I'd argue that the road on SPS checks should be crossed when we come to it (and not before) but we probably need to let the politics and emotions from the exit process settle a bit before we can get back to it.NickPalmer said:
I think that's a fair summary of the "par" attitude - I'd be in favour of full union (and ultimately of world government in perhaps 100 years) but accept that it's a position on one extreme. I think the Brexit rhetoric has made the EU feel they need to err on the side of caution with "equivalence", since there seems to be an element of UK thinking that actively wants divergence ("otherwise why bother with Brexit"), and proving harm is a tedious, fractious and difficult process. If the onus on the "diverger" was to get acceptance that it wasn't causing any harm, that would be uncontroversial.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, the problem was the degree of integration. Unfortunately, we were given a take it or leave it choice, with the very strong likelihood the integration would continue further in future - perhaps under different administrations - and no-one felt they'd be asked again for decades. So we decided to leave it.Cyclefree said:
As @rcs1000 has explained a gazillion times, effective economic unity necessarily requires a degree of political unity. See, for instance, the Singke Market. It simply is not possible to have the sort of trading relationship there was in the Singke Market without some degree of political integration. The amount of such integration is the issue, of course.Mysticrose said:
Exactly.Richard_Tyndall said:
Actually that tweet is wrong. Britain consistently opposed the status of the EEAS as it is known and blocked it having full diplomatic status on organisations such as the UN and OSCE.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1352195106837770240Mysticrose said:I don't think the EU should have ambassadorial status and I don't think it's petty. For good or ill we did Brexit and we marked ourselves out as a nation state. We live with that and by that. The EU should be no exception.
If you believe in Brexit, which I didn't, then it's consistent and right.
I think it's consistent and right that following Brexit we take this decision. I hope Boris sticks to his guns on it, although I'm doubtful he will.
It's important that we start as we mean to go on. Our dealings as an independent country vaguely attached by land to Europe but with many historic and cultural ties beyond need to be on the correct footing from the outset. We'll deal with nations at an ambassadorial level not self-appointed superstates.
I was a Remainer but the EU's worst trait has been its attempt to shift from economic unity to political unity. Vive la difference!
That is why the claim that we want only the trade and not the political stuff was nonsense. And why now - because we have decided against the political stuff - we are realising the cost to our trade.
I think our long-term "par" relationship across party lines would be a common market (with votes) with some regulatory flexibility at national level as well as EU level, free movement for temporary workers (not "citizens") and with caps if it gets really silly) and multilateral collaboration on political matters of mutual interest. But not legal, social, cultural, fiscal, or broader federal union.
The most silly example at the moment is the SPS rules (which other than the political argument of "cherrypicking" I can't understand why it can't be done on an equivalence and LPF basis, with extra checks in future if we diverge) because our fresh meat and fish is part of the same ecosystem and rules at present and no more dangerous or risky than it was on 31st December.
To give a concrete example in my area of interest: the EU is phasing out the practice of dosing all animals in a herd with antibiotics in case overcrowding might cause an infection to rip through the herd (because mass use of antibiotics leaks through to humans and increases the risk of antibiotic resistance). Britain is umming and ahing about dfoing the same and probably won't. Will that divergence cause harm to the EU? Hard to prove until there's actually example of antibiotic resistance spreading as a result. But it's understandable that they are worried about it.1 -
Given how bad the people complaining think the PM is, surely it's better for him to do harmless visits than actually PMing.FrancisUrquhart said:
Oh goodie we are back to this nonsense....why is Boris at a vaccination centre, why is he visiting flood damaged areas....cos he is the sodding Prime Minister....i notice no criticism of Starmer for doing the same.Scott_xP said:Is the Government message this week still STAY AT HOME !!! ?
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1352221208700452864
1 -
You obviously know much more about Truman than do I, but I’m struck by his lack of ego compared to his predecessor and probably most of his successors. A case for modesty gets the job done, and possibly comparisons with Attlee on a personal level?Richard_Tyndall said:
I would add The Marshall Plan, NATO and the UN as well. Oh and the Berlin Airlift.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.3 -
Good point. Why include Schengen but not the CTA?MaxPB said:
Or the CTA.Philip_Thompson said:
Dumb post. There's two new circle that needs drawing in that venn diagram, with our trade agreements with the EU and the EFTA. 🙄Scott_xP said:
It seems some people want a Ptolemaic geocentric model of the universe but with the EU at the centre of it rather than the earth. To them everything orbits the EU and anything else is immaterial.1 -
Its very similar to the key stat with the AZ vaccine that no one who was vaccinated was admitted to hospital.Anabobazina said:
This appears to be the key story to me.Richard_Nabavi said:
There is some quite encouraging data buried in the headline Israel figures:MaxPB said:
Deaths are a lagging indicator and not a good measure for vaccine effectiveness for a while because there are loads of cases in or entering the funnel right now.tlg86 said:
Lockdown. Definitely not the vaccine as deaths are still going up.CarlottaVance said:
According to preliminary results published last week from a study of 600,000 recipients of the Pfizer vaccine, of 4,500 Israelis who tested positive after receiving their first vaccine dose, 244 were admitted to hospital because of the coronavirus in the first week following the jab,.. In the second week after the jab, 124 people were taken to hospital, but after that only seven more people fell ill enough to stay in hospital.
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/covid-vaccine-israel-vaccination-roll-out-transmissibility-programme-palestine-834999?ITO=msn
That suggests to me a very high real-world efficacy in terms of serious cases, which are after all the most important from a personal protection point of view.
Just the sort of numbers we need to see and reflective of the trial data, which speaks to a fortnight latency before any immunity is achieved.1 -
I agree. The fact that really sold me on him was that when he was done as President he went back to Missouri and lived off his army pension, refusing any post or job that would have played on his former position as President. So much so that eventually Congress had to introduce a pension for former Presidents as they were the one branch of Government that was specifically excluded from receiving a pension until then.Theuniondivvie said:
You obviously know much more about Truman than do I, but I’m struck by his lack of ego compared to his predecessor and probably most of his successors. A case for modesty gets the job done, and possibly comparisons with Attlee on a personal level?Richard_Tyndall said:
I would add The Marshall Plan, NATO and the UN as well. Oh and the Berlin Airlift.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.1 -
I’m old enough to remember when wee Paul was ranting about face masks.CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/paulbsinclair/status/1351848554881568770?s=20DavidL said:
I really don't like how independence supporting placemen have filled the offices of Scotland's quangocracy and use their positions to promote their cause.OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/paulbsinclair/status/1276820688410750976?s=210 -
Carried through to its logical conclusion this will end up with women and men's sports being merged. Once biological men are in women's teams then to succeed all team's will need biological men. You would then end up with women's teams with majority male members. Following that what is the point of having separate men and women's teams events - there should surely just be one? Then women's sport will have been obliterated all as a result of letting a few transgender women compete.BluestBlue said:
'Any educational institution that receives federal funding must admit biologically-male athletes to women's teams, women's scholarships, etc.'Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
This sounds perfectly fine. What could possibly go wrong?
I support the right of anyone to take part in any sport they wish. However, if you want to be involved in competition then I'm afraid it should be done on a combination of birth gender and strictly defined biological characteristics. If you aren't born female and your biological characteristics are not within the defined boundaries for being a woman then you compete against men.
2 -
Also the smaller complement of aircraft as a result. Less bang for the buck. But at least it didn't have to go back to Pompey for a refit.Malmesbury said:
There is whole argument about that within the naval historian community - some hold that while the armoured flight decks were useful for reducing the effects of smaller hits, the box girder they created could distort easily as a result of fire - doing massive (but less obvious) damage to the carrier.Fysics_Teacher said:
And now with the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u57eMtz-PAE&t=1139sFysics_Teacher said:
I saw this recently: a set of eye-witness accounts of kamikaze attacks on an RN aircraft carrier. It turns out having an armoured flight deck can be quite useful...Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.
My father was in the RN - for a while on a carrier, with Corsairs like in the film landing on the roof. He was very relieved not to have to serve in the invasion of Japan and would never accept any criticism of the decision to drop the nukes. Oddly enough he ended up visiting Hiroshima on a port visit in another ship some years later.0 -
And of course that is largely an elderly population reflected in those figures.Richard_Nabavi said:
There is some quite encouraging data buried in the headline Israel figures:MaxPB said:
Deaths are a lagging indicator and not a good measure for vaccine effectiveness for a while because there are loads of cases in or entering the funnel right now.tlg86 said:
Lockdown. Definitely not the vaccine as deaths are still going up.CarlottaVance said:
According to preliminary results published last week from a study of 600,000 recipients of the Pfizer vaccine, of 4,500 Israelis who tested positive after receiving their first vaccine dose, 244 were admitted to hospital because of the coronavirus in the first week following the jab,.. In the second week after the jab, 124 people were taken to hospital, but after that only seven more people fell ill enough to stay in hospital.
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/covid-vaccine-israel-vaccination-roll-out-transmissibility-programme-palestine-834999?ITO=msn
That suggests to me a very high real-world efficacy in terms of serious cases, which are after all the most important from a personal protection point of view.2 -
Not just British firefighters trying to save vaccines either:DavidL said:
You can't say Gaia's not trying but the infestation is persistent and adaptive. So far homo sapiens has retained the upper hand.FrancisUrquhart said:On FFS....
FIREFIGHTERS are battling to save a factory producing the Oxford Covid vaccine in North Wales from flooding caused by Storm Christoph. Emergency services raced to Wrexham Industrial Estate last night to protect the jab - as 2,000 homes across England were evacuated following torrential rainfall overnight.
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/fire-at-world-s-biggest-vaccine-maker-in-india-1.11511820 -
I'm also struck by the implicit suggestion that public sector management jobs should still be given only to No to Indy voters - now a minority. It's not long since the MoD tried to sack someone for believing in Scottish independence, and that wasn't a senior position either.Theuniondivvie said:
I’m old enough to remember when wee Paul was ranting about face masks.CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/paulbsinclair/status/1351848554881568770?s=20DavidL said:
I really don't like how independence supporting placemen have filled the offices of Scotland's quangocracy and use their positions to promote their cause.OldKingCole said:
How does one 'inadvertently' write a 3000 word article?CarlottaVance said:
https://twitter.com/paulbsinclair/status/1276820688410750976?s=210 -
There is not only the issue of fairness, in contact sports there is the issue of safety.AlistairM said:
Carried through to its logical conclusion this will end up with women and men's sports being merged. Once biological men are in women's teams then to succeed all team's will need biological men. You would then end up with women's teams with majority male members. Following that what is the point of having separate men and women's teams events - there should surely just be one? Then women's sport will have been obliterated all as a result of letting a few transgender women compete.BluestBlue said:
'Any educational institution that receives federal funding must admit biologically-male athletes to women's teams, women's scholarships, etc.'Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
This sounds perfectly fine. What could possibly go wrong?
I support the right of anyone to take part in any sport they wish. However, if you want to be involved in competition then I'm afraid it should be done on a combination of birth gender and strictly defined biological characteristics. If you aren't born female and your biological characteristics are not within the defined boundaries for being a woman then you compete against men.2 -
Full paper atMary_Batty said:
I don't think I've seen anyone spelling it out in words, but a few graphs have been put on here showing an elbow shape in the detected infections after about a week; the placebo groups continue in a straight line, and the therapeutic groups show a sharp bend towards flat.Philip_Thompson said:
Fantastic news if true. Does match with the Pfizer trial data too.Richard_Nabavi said:Interesting from Matt Hancock:
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1352210070172532736
An interesting thing that I don't think I've seen anyone mention but from the Pfizer trial data there was no immune response in days 1-7 from initial injection, it takes time between injection happening and the immune response beginning . . . but there was an immediate 90% immune response from days 1-7 after the second injection.
Now logically either the second injection is having an immediate and dramatic response despite not really having had time to work yet . . . or the 90% protection seen in days 22-28 was from the initial injection having had 21 days to work and the second injection wasn't very relevant in those days.
If one dose is 90% and the second dose gives an extra 5% then the UK is most definitely doing the right thing and will save tens of thousands of lives from its rollout. Hundreds of thousands globally if it gets copied.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
"Figure 3 shows cases of Covid-19 or severe Covid-19 with onset at any time after the first dose (mITT population) (additional data on severe Covid-19 are available in Table S5). Between the first dose and the second dose, 39 cases in the BNT162b2 group and 82 cases in the placebo group were observed, resulting in a vaccine efficacy of 52% (95% CI, 29.5 to 68.4) during this interval and indicating early protection by the vaccine, starting as soon as 12 days after the first dose."
Figure 3 referred to is
2 -
Would keeping MacArthur underf control qualify, perhaps?Richard_Tyndall said:
I would add The Marshall Plan, NATO and the UN as well. Oh and the Berlin Airlift.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.2 -
Big numbers that put the times in perspective. eg 19 aircraft carriers of all types, 750 aircraft, 675,000 personnel in the BPF. Also of course sigificant commonwealth and other contribution.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.
USA not overly happy at the old Empire reasserting itself, which was one aim - that did not stand contact with reality for too many years.0 -
I don't think of you as a philistine. It is a shame that's all. There is a musicality and rhythm and muscularity to English which finds some of its best expression in poems, and other writings as well (the King James Bible for instance). At my primary school we learnt a poem each week and learnt to recite it, too. It is a wonderful way of teaching English to children. Think of nursery rhymes as poems and how children respond to them. Poems are words in musical form really. Good speakers have a musical quality to them which listeners respond to, almost without realising it.Casino_Royale said:
I know you think I'm a philistine on this but I really struggle with most poetry. I usually need to have it explained to me to appreciate it, with some rare exceptions, and even then I'm sometimes a bit meh. Maybe that's because I'm an engineer and deal in logical statements!Cyclefree said:
I listen to and recite poetry to myself quite a lot. It is something I've done since childhood. I listened to it and found it really hard to listen to. It just became words washing over me. It felt like a speech rather than a poem.Richard_Nabavi said:
Interesting. Despite the fact that I'm a fully signed-up old fogey, I thought it was rather good, with some parts very good. It was a bit too long, but there were some truly striking phrases, such as 'a nation that isn’t broken, but simply unfinished'.Cyclefree said:While I like the idea of poems being read at important occasions (and unimportant ones, come to that), I thought Amanda Gorman's poem yesterday was drivel. Though kudos to her for her self-possession while reciting it.
...
Stylistically, it was clearly based on rap, with soft, falling rhymes and pseudo-rhymes:
It’s because being American is more than a pride we inherit.
It’s the past we step into and how we repair it.
We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it.
Would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy.
OK, it was perhaps a bit on the mawkish side, but no more than so than many celebratory poems written for ceremonial occasions, including the vast bulk of the official output of our own Poet Laureates since time immemorial.
Poems - to me - especially when well spoken force you to really listen, really focus. Whereas this quickly became background noise to me.
But it's very personal I accept.
John Betjeman I enjoyed, chiefly because I could relate to the subject matter, and found his poems rather amusing.
Some of the WW1 poetry has stayed with me too. But it's too dark and disturbing for me to want to re-read regularly.
I think maybe if you haven't been exposed to poetry when young it is hard to relate to and poems are thought of as difficult. But there are some that have provided real comfort to me at times. Others express my thoughts better than I can myself.
If I had one piece of advice for parents of young children it is to read poems to them or get those tapes of people reading them for them to hear at night. It does wonders for their language and memory skills. English is such a beautiful language. It is lovely when it is well spoken (I don't mean accents which are irrelevant). To me, it is like having a nail scratching a blackboard when I hear people making speeches or public statements with a tin ear for the sense or rhythm of their words.3 -
I've had no real issues with Teams - I'm either lucky or have low expectationsSandpit said:
Pretty much anything else is better than Teams, the problem is that for most companies it’s included in their Office subscription and doesn’t require any money spending on purchasing and installing it.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.
Depending on the main use cases, Slack, Webex, Skype, Signal or even plain old FaceTime work much better.0 -
There are 2 extremes here - (i) no trans protections for women's sport or (ii) no trans in women's sport - and I support neither. The first is to disregard genuine concerns for the sake of dogma. The second is to disregard genuine concerns for the sake of dogma.Cyclefree said:
You should. It does not matter what anyone calls themselves or thinks of themselves as. Words do not change biological reality. If people who are biologically male compete with women, then they will have a physical advantage which no amount of skill or training by women can overcome.kinabalu said:
Well if that's the view of what is surely the doughtiest fighter for women's rights on here, perhaps he is on the wrong track. Let me have another think about it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
Women's sporting competitions will be no more.0 -
As expressed (in colourful language) by Joe Rogan, among others:FrancisUrquhart said:
There is not only the issue of fairness, in contact sports there is the issue of safety.AlistairM said:
Carried through to its logical conclusion this will end up with women and men's sports being merged. Once biological men are in women's teams then to succeed all team's will need biological men. You would then end up with women's teams with majority male members. Following that what is the point of having separate men and women's teams events - there should surely just be one? Then women's sport will have been obliterated all as a result of letting a few transgender women compete.BluestBlue said:
'Any educational institution that receives federal funding must admit biologically-male athletes to women's teams, women's scholarships, etc.'Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, been more preoccupied with other matters this morning, but there's a reason why men and women are separated in sport. It sounds like Biden's approach is nuts.
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
This sounds perfectly fine. What could possibly go wrong?
I support the right of anyone to take part in any sport they wish. However, if you want to be involved in competition then I'm afraid it should be done on a combination of birth gender and strictly defined biological characteristics. If you aren't born female and your biological characteristics are not within the defined boundaries for being a woman then you compete against men.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=xJitwGYWv5c0 -
And facing down MacArthur. Who might have started a nuclear war all of his own.Richard_Tyndall said:
I would add The Marshall Plan, NATO and the UN as well. Oh and the Berlin Airlift.Sean_F said:
Ending the war in the Pacific, defending South Korea, and desegregating the army were impressive achievements by any measure. Two things I only found out recently were that huge British forces were earmarked for the invasion of Japan, and the Royal Navy fought at Okinawa.Richard_Tyndall said:
I did make the case yesterday for him being, in my opinion, the best President of the 20th century. I know it is not a view widely held but I am happy to fight my corner on it.Sean_F said:
Truman might almost be considered a great President. He was certainly a very good one, and he made the right decision to use the A-bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
Well even if I did have an issue with moving Churchill (or any other bust) - which of course I don't - I certainly couldn't complain about replacing him with Truman. An excellent choice.kinabalu said:
Replaced by Truman apparently. Fair enough, I'd say. He's one of the iconic Democratic presidents. In fact you like him, I seem to recall. Also allays any fears of super wokeness. Nothing woke about Truman. He dropped the A bomb.Richard_Tyndall said:
It would be interesting to see what other busts, paintings etc Biden has removed - just as his predecessors did when they entered the White House for the first time. Making a stink out of this or drawing any conclusions about policy from it seems pretty daft to me.kinabalu said:
Has Churchill gone again from the White House?Nigelb said:Apparently bustflakes are a thing.
He's in and out of there like nobody's business!
The world runs on realpolitik. Whether or not there is a particular bust sat in a particular office is not going to affect whatever relationship exists between the US and UK.
He didn't get any thanks at the time, portrayed by the Republicans as a weak president who 'lost' China, but he was a remarkable leader.1 -
Seems pretty reasonable. In most walks of life it doesnt and shouldn't matter but it really does there.Philip_Thompson said:
Treat everyone as equal and with respect. Trans women should be able to understand that they are to be treated in general as women despite being biologically male, but for the purposes of sport biology matters. So they can be recognised as women but in doing so would become ineligible for sport - in the same way someone doping is. Its not doping, but its the same biological effect.kjh said:
Trans in sport is an impossible problem.Scott_xP said:While the Biden Presidency will be about returning to sanity in most respects, it is "woke" and will do dumb shit like this
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
I get frustrated with both sides on the issue of men/women/trans. Just treat people as people. I don't give a toss what you are.
And that works for just about everything, except women's sport.
Except for a few specific sports the physical difference is important and the solution can't be to just treat everyone as equal as otherwise half the population has been removed from competitive sport. Yet that still leaves the trans issue.
I don't know what the answer is.
I don't see why that is unreasonable?0 -
But is the CTA actually relevant when it comes to free trade? Isnt it much more to do with passport-free travel, reciprocal rights to settle, vote ect between GB and ROI?MaxPB said:
Or the CTA.Philip_Thompson said:
Dumb post. There's two new circle that needs drawing in that venn diagram, with our trade agreements with the EU and the EFTA. 🙄Scott_xP said:0 -
3
This discussion has been closed.