I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
I think the rapid vaccine roll out is the one thing keeping the lid on public unrest in the UK. We have a terrible death rate, a nearly-crushed NHS, and significant daily cases (albeit, finally, falling). The economy is cratered, many are suffering, impoverishment beckons for the nation.
However, we have this one precious thing. Hope. Provided by the excellent vaccine programme. And hope is worth more than almost anything. We see a way out, so we endure, and grit our teeth. We've had a shit plague, compared to most countries, but spring is not far away.
Now imagine Britain WITHOUT a massive, successful vaccine programme.
Wow.
It is no wonder there have been huge riots in Holland. Will Spain avoid the same? France? Madame Le Pen could win at this rate. Her victory will be the French riot, the storming of the Elysee a la QAnon. That 52:48 French prez elex poll is a dire augury.
Yes, having that light at the end of the tunnel is a huge deal for my mental state and for a lot of others I know. I now have an end date to this horrible half existence we've all been forced into, it's not close for someone my age but it's there and I can see it on the horizon.
In Europe it must be awful, there's a neverending bad news cycle on vaccines whether it's supply or anti-vaxxers. There's just no light at the end of the tunnel for anyone under the age of 70.
Yes, I've typed my postcode, age, et al, into the Times computer, and they say I should be vaxxed by March, possibly early March the way things are going in London.
It is what I cling on to during the dark days, and fuck me, there are dark days.
On top of that, I can now see friends and family getting vaxxed. Both my elderly parents (twice), a close friend today, others have their letters, it really is happening.
If I lived in a locked down advanced nation with a terribly slow vax programme which gave me no hope til "the end of the year maybe" - hello Holland - I might be discreetly rioting. As they are in Holland, as it happens.
It is happening.
And for your own mental health, I’d counsel you to take a step back and look at the bulk of evidence, rather than reacting to everything you see on Twitter.
And I say that in good faith, and with best wishes.
Thankyou. I am generally in good mental health, but - like all of us? - I have bad days during lockdown. They seem to come out of nowhere. As a humble dildo flint knapper with a good income I am luckier than most. My work endures like my income. I live alone but have plenty of friends to meet outdoors. plus kids I bubble with.
But lockdown can still hit me, out of the blue. eg I wake up, one morning, and think: Jesus fucking christ. Is this really happening? IS it really this bad? And then a bad day of doomscrolling ensues.
Vigorous exercise helps. Plus talking to friends. And booze. And fish suppers.
But there is no predicting when the bad days will happen, and they are bad, and they don't seem related to any particular news events or hormonal change or even the weather. They just come, and squat, like Larkin's toad.
The booze is not helping you.
Thanks, I'll take that rare and unusual advice on board.
Perhaps you could avail us of your experience? How are you finding lockdown, emotionally, spiritually, psychologically?
These are genuine questions. I find personal reactions to this unprecedented crisis quite absorbing and enlightening.
I'm doing rather well, thank you. The biggest improvement to my mental health in recent years came after I stopped looking at Twitter every day. Anabobazina's advice the the soundest thing I've read on these pages all week. Twitter makes people of all political stripes anxious, angry, and tribal. I see quite a few friends and family members suffering from it.
Well then, we are one and the same. I gave up commenting on Twitter two years ago, and now use it for half an hour a day, to catch up with news. I used to get into obsessive pointless Twitter arguments (about things which didn't even concern me, in the slightest) and they could take up hours. Useless, wasted hours, at the end of which I just felt spent, and irritated. and vacant, and frustrated. I never "won" - no one "wins" on Twitter. The concept is redundant. The argument can always go on.
Twitter is designed to addict, in the worst way, like crack. So, in their own manner, are Facebook and Insta and TikTok.
I now use social media very very sparingly, and do a lot more reading and exercise, and feel better for it.
I still drink a lot and visit PB a lot, but they either inform me, or relax me, or both. so they are fine.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Without vaccine, the third wave is going to rip through the EU for the next couple of months at least. We are starting to get to the point where shit got serious last year - the weather won't come to their aid for a while yet.
Their economies are going to be a mess too. Until they do get through it, they are going to need money. Huge amounts of money. The ECB is going to have to dig deep. Again.
And the worse it gets for them, the worse it gets for us too. We can't get away from it. Quite besides your single largest trade partner tanking, there are all those bloody truck drivers going back and forth everyday, each a potential vector. One of the priorities post-pandemic should be to ramp up container capacity and try to get road haulage in and out of Britain down to levels where we can survive without it - quite apart from building and maintaining capacity in areas like vaccine manufacture and diagnostic testing, we also need the ability to completely stop the flow of people for when something like this happens again. Because, whether in 10, 20 or 100 years, it will happen again.
Anyway, just realised it's stupendously late. Goodnight all.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
That would the most awful, short term reactionary politics not to talk to them and help. Madness.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
That would the most awful, short term reactionary politics not to talk to them and help. Madness.
I think the rapid vaccine roll out is the one thing keeping the lid on public unrest in the UK. We have a terrible death rate, a nearly-crushed NHS, and significant daily cases (albeit, finally, falling). The economy is cratered, many are suffering, impoverishment beckons for the nation.
However, we have this one precious thing. Hope. Provided by the excellent vaccine programme. And hope is worth more than almost anything. We see a way out, so we endure, and grit our teeth. We've had a shit plague, compared to most countries, but spring is not far away.
Now imagine Britain WITHOUT a massive, successful vaccine programme.
Wow.
It is no wonder there have been huge riots in Holland. Will Spain avoid the same? France? Madame Le Pen could win at this rate. Her victory will be the French riot, the storming of the Elysee a la QAnon. That 52:48 French prez elex poll is a dire augury.
Yes, having that light at the end of the tunnel is a huge deal for my mental state and for a lot of others I know. I now have an end date to this horrible half existence we've all been forced into, it's not close for someone my age but it's there and I can see it on the horizon.
In Europe it must be awful, there's a neverending bad news cycle on vaccines whether it's supply or anti-vaxxers. There's just no light at the end of the tunnel for anyone under the age of 70.
Yes, I've typed my postcode, age, et al, into the Times computer, and they say I should be vaxxed by March, possibly early March the way things are going in London.
It is what I cling on to during the dark days, and fuck me, there are dark days.
On top of that, I can now see friends and family getting vaxxed. Both my elderly parents (twice), a close friend today, others have their letters, it really is happening.
If I lived in a locked down advanced nation with a terribly slow vax programme which gave me no hope til "the end of the year maybe" - hello Holland - I might be discreetly rioting. As they are in Holland, as it happens.
It is happening.
And for your own mental health, I’d counsel you to take a step back and look at the bulk of evidence, rather than reacting to everything you see on Twitter.
And I say that in good faith, and with best wishes.
Thankyou. I am generally in good mental health, but - like all of us? - I have bad days during lockdown. They seem to come out of nowhere. As a humble dildo flint knapper with a good income I am luckier than most. My work endures like my income. I live alone but have plenty of friends to meet outdoors. plus kids I bubble with.
But lockdown can still hit me, out of the blue. eg I wake up, one morning, and think: Jesus fucking christ. Is this really happening? IS it really this bad? And then a bad day of doomscrolling ensues.
Vigorous exercise helps. Plus talking to friends. And booze. And fish suppers.
But there is no predicting when the bad days will happen, and they are bad, and they don't seem related to any particular news events or hormonal change or even the weather. They just come, and squat, like Larkin's toad.
The booze is not helping you.
Thanks, I'll take that rare and unusual advice on board.
Perhaps you could avail us of your experience? How are you finding lockdown, emotionally, spiritually, psychologically?
These are genuine questions. I find personal reactions to this unprecedented crisis quite absorbing and enlightening.
I'm doing rather well, thank you. The biggest improvement to my mental health in recent years came after I stopped looking at Twitter every day. Anabobazina's advice the the soundest thing I've read on these pages all week. Twitter makes people of all political stripes anxious, angry, and tribal. I see quite a few friends and family members suffering from it.
I used to have a Twitter account. Got rid of it a couple of years ago. Whilst I used it mainly to gather news, facts and follow sensible commentators, it can nonetheless allow a drip drip effect of pretty extreme partisan anger in through your computer. It's really not very nice at all. Anti-social media in general is bad like that.
Congratulations you saw the light. However most of those who are vociferous about the perils of social media and the viewpoints it peddles are generally people who use social media and what they really mean is people should not be able to publish stuff I don't like.
The human race would be on the whole better of if most people rejected most forms of social media
We can certainly agree there. I have never used Twitter. Am only on FB to reconnect with High School friends on the other side of the world. Most of whom are normal and sensible. It is wryly amusing folk get irate with Twitter, Sky news, Fox, CNN, the BBC, the Mail, Sun, Guardian whatever. None are compulsory. If they enrage you. Turn them off.
Not much glimmer of hope for those out of work and who haven't worked for months.
I've friends who have been ruined by this. Either by redundancy or by being self employed and not being covered by furlough.
When all is said and done this is yet another wealth transfer from the young to the old.
I don't know, there are plenty of middle-aged self-employed people not covered by furlough.
But, yes, Sunak is totally overrated, like Starmer. A ex-Goldman Sachs wide boy who married his fortune and doesn't care who he screws over to get to the top. I just hope he's found out sooner rather than later.
He's not quite as malevolent as Priti Patel, though, in fairness.
As part of the agreement, Novavax agreed to create a dedicated supply chain in the U.K. for the production of that country's order. The company will be required to deliver those 60 million doses to the U.K. government before using that supply chain to fulfill orders for any other parties unless the U.K. government gives it permission.
Once the initial order is fulfilled, Novavax will be able to take orders from other parties using that portion of its production capacity, but the U.K. government will retain the right to request additional batches to match the third-party sales on a pro-rata basis.
If I were a betting man, which I am, I'd be inclined to the view that the agreement with AZ includes a similar clause.
I must confess that until today I hadn't fully appreciated quite how remarkable Kate Bingham's vaccine taskforce has been. It wasn't just about procuring Covid-19 vaccines (although that in itself is a superb achievement), it's also been about boosting the UK's overall research and manufacturing capability in vaccines:
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I think the rapid vaccine roll out is the one thing keeping the lid on public unrest in the UK. We have a terrible death rate, a nearly-crushed NHS, and significant daily cases (albeit, finally, falling). The economy is cratered, many are suffering, impoverishment beckons for the nation.
However, we have this one precious thing. Hope. Provided by the excellent vaccine programme. And hope is worth more than almost anything. We see a way out, so we endure, and grit our teeth. We've had a shit plague, compared to most countries, but spring is not far away.
Now imagine Britain WITHOUT a massive, successful vaccine programme.
Wow.
It is no wonder there have been huge riots in Holland. Will Spain avoid the same? France? Madame Le Pen could win at this rate. Her victory will be the French riot, the storming of the Elysee a la QAnon. That 52:48 French prez elex poll is a dire augury.
Yes, having that light at the end of the tunnel is a huge deal for my mental state and for a lot of others I know. I now have an end date to this horrible half existence we've all been forced into, it's not close for someone my age but it's there and I can see it on the horizon.
In Europe it must be awful, there's a neverending bad news cycle on vaccines whether it's supply or anti-vaxxers. There's just no light at the end of the tunnel for anyone under the age of 70.
The reaction of my Group 4 friend who got jabbed 2 weeks ago was interesting - he said he felt as though an enormous weight had been lifted from his shoulders - he's well aware he could still catch it, it could still kill him, and he won't have decent immunity for a while - so he's staying very careful - but he has had a real sense of relief.
My wife, as an anaesthetist on the front line doing aerosol generating procedures with COVID patients and others, has had both shots now (Pfizer). She had the same sense of enormous relief. And no longer has near panic attacks each time she has to intubate a COVID patient.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
That would the most awful, short term reactionary politics not to talk to them and help. Madness.
Reality I am afraid
If I was PM, I would say yeah.
If you are really convinced we would scratch their back in their hour of need, but they would never return the favour. Fine.
But really you can’t do politics like that. You have always got to look to build partnership, because you don’t know what the future holds.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
That would the most awful, short term reactionary politics not to talk to them and help. Madness.
We can talk to them and help them.
After we have helped ourselves.
The manufacturing we've paid for (that they haven't paid for) will still be there once our needs have been met.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
That would the most awful, short term reactionary politics not to talk to them and help. Madness.
Reality I am afraid
If I was PM, I would say yeah.
If you are really convinced we would scratch their back in their hour of need, but they would never return the favour. Fine.
But really you can’t do politics like that. You have always got to look to build partnership, because you don’t know what the future holds.
The EU at present does not see the UK in a conciliatory way
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
There's no long game. The EU treat everything as transactional. There is no benefit to us in helping them.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I'm sorry you found that flippant. I thought I drew a clear line. Jay Kay LARPer attempted to overturn a democratic election. And came bloody close to succeeding. No polity would stand for that. None. And if they did, they wouldn't last long. There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences. It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Not a homily, evidence and reason.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Are you suggesting that we give genuinely excess capacity to the EU, or that vaccine candidates in the UK should have their vaccination delayed to send vaccines to the EU?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Boris does not have to say yes until our order is completed and if you think the public is on your side on this then you are misjudging the mood in the country
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Not a homily, evidence and reason.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
“Charity begins at home”. “we have what we need”
What if it wasn’t vaccine? What if it was... potatoes.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I'm sorry you found that flippant. I thought I drew a clear line. Jay Kay LARPer attempted to overturn a democratic election. And came bloody close to succeeding. No polity would stand for that. None. And if they did, they wouldn't last long. There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences. It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
Can you tell me what crimes JayKay committed and what sentences you propose for those crimes?*
(*I think he is an odious moron, a criminal and should be punished. I don't however agree that he should be given 28 years, lose his entire life in a US jail with no realistic chance of rehabilitation. You do. Tell me why.)
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Not a homily, evidence and reason.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
“Charity begins at home”. “we have what we need”
What if it wasn’t vaccine? What if it was... potatoes.
If it was potatoes and we had spares we should send them.
If it was potatoes and we had people starving and over a thousand people a day dying due to a lack of food - I would give the potatoes to our own citizens who are starving to death.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Not a homily, evidence and reason.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
“Charity begins at home”. “we have what we need”
What if it wasn’t vaccine? What if it was... potatoes.
If it was potatoes and we had spares we should send them.
If it was potatoes and we had people starving and over a thousand people a day dying due to a lack of food - I would give the potatoes to our own citizens who are starving to death.
We don't have any spares.
You'll both regret this metaphor if it turns out we do start sending spare vaccines to Ireland.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I'm sorry you found that flippant. I thought I drew a clear line. Jay Kay LARPer attempted to overturn a democratic election. And came bloody close to succeeding. No polity would stand for that. None. And if they did, they wouldn't last long. There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences. It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
Can you tell me what crimes JayKay committed and what sentences you propose for those crimes?*
(*I think he is an odious moron, a criminal and should be punished. I don't however agree that he should be given 28 years, lose his entire life in a US jail with no realistic chance of rehabilitation. You do. Tell me why.)
Treason? Sedition? Terrorism? And the FBI have him in writing plotting the death of the politicians in the building at the time.
What more do you want for a treasonous terrorist to face justice?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
They are willing to fuck us over - they can sort themselves out now.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
What if its literally potatoes or death for us?
Once we're no longer dying due to a lack of potatoes then share any excess we have with them. How can you ask more than that?
Indeed. I commented earlier. This man writes like an angel. But sadly detracts from it by drawing conclusions wholly in excess of the evidence. Unfortunately, he will neither hear my praise nor my reservations on an obscure website such as this one.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Boris does not have to say yes until our order is completed and if you think the public is on your side on this then you are misjudging the mood in the country
No problem helping once our order is complete
Even then lets help countries that can't afford the vaccines rather than rich neighbours who are more than willing to adopt a beggar my neighbour approach
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Are you suggesting that we give genuinely excess capacity to the EU, or that vaccine candidates in the UK should have their vaccination delayed to send vaccines to the EU?
It would certainly take a brave British PM to snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live!
It's just.... not going to happen. Nor would it happen the other way. RIDIC.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
What if its literally potatoes or death for us?
Once we're no longer dying due to a lack of potatoes then share any excess we have with them. How can you ask more than that?
If I was starving, would you not cut your potato in half and give it to me? 😕
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Not a homily, evidence and reason.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
“Charity begins at home”. “we have what we need”
What if it wasn’t vaccine? What if it was... potatoes.
If it was potatoes and we had spares we should send them.
If it was potatoes and we had people starving and over a thousand people a day dying due to a lack of food - I would give the potatoes to our own citizens who are starving to death.
We don't have any spares.
You'll both regret this metaphor if it turns out we do start sending spare vaccines to Ireland.
That is what I think we should do, but in my opinion the emphasis must be on spare. I don't think we should hoard the things - no way, I'd even cut it fine so we absolutely had no fat in the system, but we need to make best efforts to stamp this out at home first.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
There's no long game. The EU treat everything as transactional. There is no benefit to us in helping them.
Maybe gloating as they dicked about with border inspections wasn't their smartest move either.......
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
No the best politics is pragmatic, when a bloc shows they want to fuck you then you dont appease them you fuck them first. Are you the reincarnation of chamberlain, going to come back with a piece of paper declaring we will get vaccines when its our turn and the eu has had their fair share?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
What if its literally potatoes or death for us?
Once we're no longer dying due to a lack of potatoes then share any excess we have with them. How can you ask more than that?
If I was starving, would you not cut your potato in half and give it to me? 😕
But you threatened to steal my potatoes - so no fuck off
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I'm sorry you found that flippant. I thought I drew a clear line. Jay Kay LARPer attempted to overturn a democratic election. And came bloody close to succeeding. No polity would stand for that. None. And if they did, they wouldn't last long. There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences. It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
Can you tell me what crimes JayKay committed and what sentences you propose for those crimes?*
(*I think he is an odious moron, a criminal and should be punished. I don't however agree that he should be given 28 years, lose his entire life in a US jail with no realistic chance of rehabilitation. You do. Tell me why.)
Treason? Sedition? Terrorism? And the FBI have him in writing plotting the death of the politicians in the building at the time.
What more do you want for a treasonous terrorist to face justice?
Do you expect him to be found guilty of treason?
Even if he is, would you advocate his spending the rest of his adult life in jail?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Not a homily, evidence and reason.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
“Charity begins at home”. “we have what we need”
What if it wasn’t vaccine? What if it was... potatoes.
If it was potatoes and we had spares we should send them.
If it was potatoes and we had people starving and over a thousand people a day dying due to a lack of food - I would give the potatoes to our own citizens who are starving to death.
We don't have any spares.
You'll both regret this metaphor if it turns out we do start sending spare vaccines to Ireland.
That is what I think we should do, but in my opinion the emphasis must be on spare. I don't think we should hoard the things - no way, I'd even cut it fine so we absolutely had no fat in the system, but we need to make best efforts to stamp this out at home first.
God help me but I finally agree with you on something.
It's largely academic: no UK PM could possibly sanction delaying our vaccine rollout to help the EU, and we'd be unlikely to have enough spare capacity to make a meaningful dent in the EU population. By the time we have enough spare to help out, chances are so will they.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
US sentencing policy is pretty barbaric, and long overdue for reform. It will do no good - but they will probably not make an exception for him.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Are you suggesting that we give genuinely excess capacity to the EU, or that vaccine candidates in the UK should have their vaccination delayed to send vaccines to the EU?
It would certainly take a brave British PM to snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live!
It's just.... not going to happen. Nor would it happen the other way. RIDIC.
“ snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live! “ See? Spun for every emotional ounce. And then passed off as sound long term politics.
You know heaven and hell are exactly the same?
Identical in every regard, including the ten foot long chopsticks in the food hall.
It’s only in heaven you find the happier people, because they learnt in their lives of helping others because they can help you.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
What sentence would you give someone who plotted to overthrow the government, plotted to murder the sitting politicians, organised an attempted armed and violent coup, invaded Parliament, led to the death of a Police Officer and over 140 other Police Officers injured in the violence?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
Can you tell me one good reason why we should give any spare vaccine we have to germany instead of somalia or is it just they are white europeans?
Indeed. I commented earlier. This man writes like an angel. But sadly detracts from it by drawing conclusions wholly in excess of the evidence. Unfortunately, he will neither hear my praise nor my reservations on an obscure website such as this one.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
US sentencing policy is pretty barbaric, and long overdue for reform. It will do no good - but they will probably not make an exception for him.
Sure, I don't expect them to make an exception.
But the sentences they hand out are, as you say, barbaric, and I'm rather saddened that PBers are happy to support that barbarism because he's a political enemy.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
The correct answer is fuck off you gits
No. Never say that in a position like this. Got to play it long, work together
Was it the uk that started talking about diverting vaccines from the eu to the uk? No
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
You think best politics is emotional then, not cold bloodied intellectual?
Cold bloodied intellectual says look after yourself then you're better able to look after others.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
Wrong call in the bigger picture.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
No you're emotional.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
They have certainly messed up. But it’s not about them now. Stop bring them into it. It’s about us.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
What if its literally potatoes or death for us?
Once we're no longer dying due to a lack of potatoes then share any excess we have with them. How can you ask more than that?
If I was starving, would you not cut your potato in half and give it to me? 😕
Not if doing so meant I starved to death. We don't currently have too many potatoes we have to few and you want us to give some away
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I'm sorry you found that flippant. I thought I drew a clear line. Jay Kay LARPer attempted to overturn a democratic election. And came bloody close to succeeding. No polity would stand for that. None. And if they did, they wouldn't last long. There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences. It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
Can you tell me what crimes JayKay committed and what sentences you propose for those crimes?*
(*I think he is an odious moron, a criminal and should be punished. I don't however agree that he should be given 28 years, lose his entire life in a US jail with no realistic chance of rehabilitation. You do. Tell me why.)
It is late. I usually try to answer in person. @Philip_Thompson, a poster I often vehemently disagree with, has replied below. I could expand, but I shan't. We aren't going to agree. And I need to sleep.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Are you suggesting that we give genuinely excess capacity to the EU, or that vaccine candidates in the UK should have their vaccination delayed to send vaccines to the EU?
It would certainly take a brave British PM to snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live!
It's just.... not going to happen. Nor would it happen the other way. RIDIC.
“ snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live! “ See? Spun for every emotional ounce. And then passed off as sound long term politics.
You know heaven and hell are exactly the same?
Identical in every regard, including the ten foot long chopsticks in the food hall.
It’s only in heaven you find the happier people, because they learnt in their lives of helping others because they can help you.
Perhaps the EU might want to ponder on "because they can help you"
Sorry - they made their bed they need to lie in it
Now, if they had asked rather than threatened and had not already shown us time and time again their lack of good faith........
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
Biden may well look at pardons at the end of his first term.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appreciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
I'm sorry you found that flippant. I thought I drew a clear line. Jay Kay LARPer attempted to overturn a democratic election. And came bloody close to succeeding. No polity would stand for that. None. And if they did, they wouldn't last long. There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences. It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
Can you tell me what crimes JayKay committed and what sentences you propose for those crimes?*
(*I think he is an odious moron, a criminal and should be punished. I don't however agree that he should be given 28 years, lose his entire life in a US jail with no realistic chance of rehabilitation. You do. Tell me why.)
Treason? Sedition? Terrorism? And the FBI have him in writing plotting the death of the politicians in the building at the time.
What more do you want for a treasonous terrorist to face justice?
Do you expect him to be found guilty of treason?
Even if he is, would you advocate his spending the rest of his adult life in jail?
For armed violence leading to four deaths? For armed violence that could have led to hundreds more if he'd got his way? For armed violence that could have led to the overthrowing of democracy?
Attempted murder can carry a life sentence. That's what this was. They have written evidence he was planning to murder the politicians in the building. Life sentence unless paroled.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
There are several elements to judicial punishment, Just one is: condignity: does the punishment fit the crime as a crime. If that is all there is to it then 2-3 years would be fine for illegal, violent trespass of the Capitol, possibly over the top, indeed. Maybe a large fine and 3 months and whatever, would be normal. If he had acted alone.
But he didn't. Another crucial element of punishment is DETERRENCE. And this becomes overriding in times of riot, sedition and insurrection, which is why judges are ALWAYS very severe on these crimes. The punishments have to be brutal and exemplary. That is what English judges did after the English riots, a year in jail for stealing water from a looted Tesco Extra. Sorry. But you did it. During nationwide looting and riot. You get a whole YEAR banged up. It was not normal shoplifting.
For a few weeks, liberals complained. They do not complain any more. Deterrence works. The riots have not recurred. The democratic state bared its teeth, and order prevailed.
This has to happen here: that is to say, in America, times ten. Democracy is worth more than any individual. So he will lose most of his life in prison? It is very sad for him. But also: tough shit.
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
Invading a Federal monument carries a sentence of ten years, thanks to an executive order.
By Donald Trump, the man they thought they were doing it for.
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
Is that all you got? Silly homilies and metaphors?
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Are you suggesting that we give genuinely excess capacity to the EU, or that vaccine candidates in the UK should have their vaccination delayed to send vaccines to the EU?
It would certainly take a brave British PM to snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live!
It's just.... not going to happen. Nor would it happen the other way. RIDIC.
“ snatch a legally British vaccine from some Glaswegian granny, or some cancer-suffering kid in Cumbria, and say No, this must go to the French! They are our allies! You must die so that a French diabetic can live! “ See? Spun for every emotional ounce. And then passed off as sound long term politics.
You know heaven and hell are exactly the same?
Identical in every regard, including the ten foot long chopsticks in the food hall.
It’s only in heaven you find the happier people, because they learnt in their lives of helping others because they can help you.
You know heaven and hell dont exist they are merely some christian fantasy?
Occasional PB game of an evening, working out who’s going to tipple themselves into a frenzy first. For once it’s not whatever he’s calling himself now guy.
German MP says he doesn't expect them to have enough vaccine to cover the population until next year, and says the EU's strategy has been "too little too late".
Occasional PB game of an evening, working out who’s going to tipple themselves into a frenzy first. For once it’s not whatever he’s calling himself now guy.
Maybe getting a paid article cheered one of him up? It's possible though there is no evidence of course.
Occasional PB game of an evening, working out who’s going to tipple themselves into a frenzy first. For once it’s not whatever he’s calling himself now guy.
Maybe getting a paid article cheered one of him up? It's possible though there is no evidence of course.
A glans exquisitely rendered in flint? Who can say.
German MP says he doesn't expect them to have enough vaccine to cover the population until next year, and says the EU's strategy has been "too little too late".
Good for him, because he's right - and, for once, not parroting the EU line. The EU has fucked the duck. I am sure they will recover, quite soon, because huge cavalries of vaccines are arriving, but for a couple of months they need to stop the Brit-bashing and look at Brussels.
I saw Cloris Leachman in a wine tasting shop in Ojai in late 2019. She was with friends, and while she needed a little assistance walking, she was full of life and enjoyed several glasses of wine.
Having read the article I am somewhat puzzled by some of the statistics
"People of colour have been subject to institutionalised racism within the healthcare system," she said.
"We are five times more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act and four times more likely to die in childbirth.
Now given that we see never ending stories of people being turned away from hospitals with mental issues and then going on to suicide or commit crimes it seems odds that those detained are far more likely to be black as I know of no study that suggests black people are subject on balance to more mental illness. The child birth one is even more bizarre , we are saying your care from frontline health workers is dependent on skin colour. Considering we are constantly being told how many ethnic minorites we have working on the frontline of the health service it cant be down to white people treating non white people differently.
77.9% of NHS staff were White (out of staff whose ethnicity was known), and 22.1% were from all other ethnic groups combined
people from each of the Asian, Chinese, Mixed and Other ethnic groups made up a larger percentage of medical staff than non-medical staff
a higher percentage of junior doctors than senior doctors were from the Black, Chinese and Mixed ethnic groups
Given I expect those that are non white not to have the prejudice that apparently white people have and given ethnic minorities are very much over represented in the health service 86.1% population for white british against 77.9% in the health service I am not sure how they can claim institutional racism unless they are saying the 22.9% are all uncle toms
Having read the article I am somewhat puzzled by some of the statistics
"People of colour have been subject to institutionalised racism within the healthcare system," she said.
"We are five times more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act and four times more likely to die in childbirth.
Now given that we see never ending stories of people being turned away from hospitals with mental issues and then going on to suicide or commit crimes it seems odds that those detained are far more likely to be black as I know of no study that suggests black people are subject on balance to more mental illness. The child birth one is even more bizarre , we are saying your care from frontline health workers is dependent on skin colour. Considering we are constantly being told how many ethnic minorites we have working on the frontline of the health service it cant be down to white people treating non white people differently.
77.9% of NHS staff were White (out of staff whose ethnicity was known), and 22.1% were from all other ethnic groups combined
people from each of the Asian, Chinese, Mixed and Other ethnic groups made up a larger percentage of medical staff than non-medical staff
a higher percentage of junior doctors than senior doctors were from the Black, Chinese and Mixed ethnic groups
Given I expect those that are non white not to have the prejudice that apparently white people have and given ethnic minorities are very much over represented in the health service 86.1% population for white british against 77.9% in the health service I am not sure how they can claim institutional racism unless they are saying the 22.9% are all uncle toms
Before the usual suspects label me racist I made the post to make a point. It is easy to say...institutional racism and leave it at that but if there are underlying issues then maybe it doesnt help. I went looking about mental health
some quotes
The Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (APMS) found that Black men were more likely than their White counterparts to experience a psychotic disorder in the last year.18 Risk of psychosis in Black Caribbean groups is estimated to be nearly seven times higher than in the White population.19 The impact of the higher rates of mental illness is that people from these groups are more likely than average to encounter mental health services.2
The latest APMS found no meaningful differences between Asian people and their White British counterparts in terms of experiencing psychotic disorders or common mental health problems.18 Those identifying as Asian or Asian British are one-third less likely to be in contact with mental health or learning disability services.20 There are some studies that suggest prevalence of mental ill-health (both common mental health problems and psychotic illness) is lower among Chinese people than their White British counterparts Chinese people are underrepresented in mental health services, rates of admission to mental health inpatient facilities
Now I am not suggesting these are genetic by any means but when you have different measurements for different groups versus the white british control and all those groups are subject to the same "non white" bigotry then maybe it suggests there is more in play and it would benefit us more to find out what.
We already know some physical diseases show a particular preference amongst certain populations such a sickle cell anaemia, colour blindness etc. Does it not benefit us more to ask why these rates rather than just assume its institutional racism?
A bunch of hedge funds made big bets that the price of GameStop would fall. They did this by finding people who had shares in it, and saying "excuse me, could I borrow your shares of GameStop, and I'll pay you interest to do so". After they borrowed the shares, they sold them.
The idea being that - in the future - they would buy the shares back at a lower price and sell them back.
This is known as "short selling".
GameStop is a failing firm, being destroyed by Amazon and digital distribution of games.
Hedge funds felt that betting on its shares going down in price was a sure thing.
However, a bunch of day traders realised that if they worked together they could engineer something called a "short squeeze", where the price of the shares would rise, and this would force the hedge funds to buy back (to "cover their shorts") at higher prices. And it's worked. The price of GameStop, which was something like $2.50 in the middle of last year, got up to $380 earlier today.
Some hedge funds hand lost hundreds of millions of dollars.
Quite a few day traders have made good money.
And the (current) price of GameStop is completely irrational. This is a loss making, sales falling, doomed business, that is currently worth about the same as the highly profitable, operates mobile phone networks in about 20 countries, Vodafone.
(Disclaimer: today the price of out the money calls on GameStop got so ridiculous, I decided to play too, and sold some myself.)
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Just as well that the EU decision-makers don’t have to answer to the voters then, isn’t it?
I'll feel really happy if it turns out, as it seems, that the first big good gesture in the new UK-EU relationship is a big helping hand from the UK.
We should give them nothing vaccine wise. We should give any spare to africa, the middle east or south america. The EU is rich enough to buy its own not our fault they screwed the pooch
South America and South Africa both seem to be good candidates for having as much excess capacity diverted to them. High density populations, with large outbreaks but not rich enough to be able to get vaccine priority.
But not the big political gesture as it would be to answer the EU call.
UK are in an excellent position to be the uninjured one in Rolf Harris 2 little boys song.
The next move is the EU will call and ask, can you share some. Has there been any polling yet on how UK gov should answer? There is going to be polling because what a big call. The sort of political decision that separates the chaff from the wheat.
To my mind the answer is absolutely yes. It’s got to be yes. Not just for the good politics of saying yes, but because saying no would be such terrible politics. We may have upper hand at this end, but if it goes into big squabble mode we could end up worse off at the other end.
Got to play the long, all working together game on this.
I would expect the public to be furious and even more so at any politician who agreed to this
Charity begins at home. Vaccinate ourselves, then they can get doses from the manufacturing we've paid for after us - just like we're planning to vaccinate the third world with.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
At 35,000’, the average middle-aged healthy person has about 15s before passing out from hypoxia. A rapid decompression also screws with your ears, turns the atmosphere into what looks like a thick fog and causes general panic, including among the crew. That last sentence took you 10s to read...
If the Government hasn't done it already, then they really ought to send armed guards to some of these key facilities. Just to dissuade any more serious nonsense.
It just takes one nutcase with a can of petrol to successfully destroy one of them and we might be in lockdown for an extra six months.
Yes. This is like production of the first US nukes towards the end of WW2. In all seriousness. Send in the army. Guard it to hell.
And if anyone tries to disrupt it, slam them in jail for 30 years, like that oaf in the Viking horns and blue and white facepaint at the Capitol.
That is to say, I do not agree with Casino. That facepainted guy was part of an attempt to overthrow the democratic structure of the USA. He may be a silly dick who believes in QAnon, but he was there, in the Capitol, with others who were intent on hanging US politicians.
IF he goes to jail for 30 years, pour encourager les autres, so be it.
We did the same with the English riots. People got serious jail time for stealing water bottles. The Guardian bleated, but then they subsided. Because the logic is good. When the entire security and stability of the nation is imperilled, you generally have to hand out draconian sentences, to scare the living shit out of anyone considering similar actions. A nation that cannot do this is fecked.
It is notable that the English riots have not, in any way, been repeated.
On this occasion I agree with Leon. Regarding terrorist anti-vaxxers and Capitol rioters. In both cases it is manslaughter. I appr eciate there is a difference when stealing bottles of water.
Can you explain to me the long-term benefit to a) the United States and b) this individual's rehabilitation to locking him up 20 years rather than two?
The United States' obsession with draconian judicial sentencing is counterproductive. We have only scratched the surface in this thread.
a) Sedition. b) De-programming takes time.
Extra bit. The US obsession with draconian sentencing for trivialities is counter productive. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you King.
Pretty flippant answer to a fair question TBH.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
So what sentence do you suggest, for someone who self-glorified - to put it mildly - in his role in an attempted coup, or something alarmingly close to it? And someone who took a selfie as he did it, in warpaint and helmet, as he invaded the seat of his own nation's democracy. in an apparent attempt to overthrow an election?
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
Biden may well look at pardons at the end of his first term.
I think the vast majority, if not all (not sure on the specific incidents) should be pardoned when Trumpism, QAnon and related false truth movements are no longer a threat. I think that this is unlikely to be as early as the end of the first term though. Hopefully at the end of his second term!
Reading the thread on Vaccinegate there does seem to be a growing feeling that The UK is 'holding all of the jabs'
I know you're joshing, but in all seriousness we shouldn't be rubbing their noses in it. The Commission's failure on vaccines is a disaster that will cost many, many lives.
However, I also believe that there's nothing inconsistent in being sympathetic towards their situation, but not helping until we've spare capacity not needed to protect our own people. The British population has paid a heavy price for the missteps of the Government (and our bad luck with the new variant) already during this pandemic; now that our leadership has got something quite spectacularly right, the British people should not be expected to endure further suffering in order to try to bail out the entire EU. Which, as others have pointed out down thread, is both impossible politically (what Government could condemn its own people to death in large numbers to send aid to anyone abroad, let alone a wealthy bloc that has boobed *AND* some of whose leaders have taken to making threats,) and impossible in fact (being that the EU is ten times bigger than we are.)
The people of the EU will simply have to suffer for their institutional failings on vaccines, in the same way as we have suffered in other respects. It's shitty, but such is life - especially life in 2021.
Reading the thread on Vaccinegate there does seem to be a growing feeling that The UK is 'holding all of the jabs'
I know you're joshing, but in all seriousness we shouldn't be rubbing their noses in it. The Commission's failure on vaccines is a disaster that will cost many, many lives.
However, I also believe that there's nothing inconsistent in being sympathetic towards their situation, but not helping until we've spare capacity not needed to protect our own people. The British population has paid a heavy price for the missteps of the Government (and our bad luck with the new variant) already during this pandemic; now that our leadership has got something quite spectacularly right, the British people should not be expected to endure further suffering in order to try to bail out the entire EU. Which, as others have pointed out down thread, is both impossible politically (what Government could condemn its own people to death in large numbers to send aid to anyone abroad, let alone a wealthy bloc that has boobed *AND* some of whose leaders have taken to making threats,) and impossible in fact (being that the EU is ten times bigger than we are.)
The people of the EU will simply have to suffer for their institutional failings on vaccines, in the same way as we have suffered in other respects. It's shitty, but such is life - especially life in 2021.
I live in Spain and right now humour is the only vaccine we have unless we're queue-jumping Mayors, Generals or Bishops!
German MP says he doesn't expect them to have enough vaccine to cover the population until next year, and says the EU's strategy has been "too little too late".
Good for him, because he's right - and, for once, not parroting the EU line. The EU has fucked the duck. I am sure they will recover, quite soon, because huge cavalries of vaccines are arriving, but for a couple of months they need to stop the Brit-bashing and look at Brussels.
Yep exactly.
Boris is handling this quite well at the moment but it's febrile.
It's quite ironic that the EU are arguing over vaccine supply of a product they still haven't managed to get themselves around to licensing.
One of the many, many, brilliant vaccine policies of this Gov't was to get the MHRA to start the regulatory process whilst data was still coming through, rather than like the EU who waited until the end of the trials before they began their seemingly endless committee process.
Everything that is so awful about the EU is being laid bare.
Comments
Was it the uk that started talking about permits to export? No I was the EU
Solidarity goes both ways they have showed they have none and will happily try and screw us over so fuck them
Twitter is designed to addict, in the worst way, like crack. So, in their own manner, are Facebook and Insta and TikTok.
I now use social media very very sparingly, and do a lot more reading and exercise, and feel better for it.
I still drink a lot and visit PB a lot, but they either inform me, or relax me, or both. so they are fine.
Anyway, just realised it's stupendously late. Goodnight all.
It is wryly amusing folk get irate with Twitter, Sky news, Fox, CNN, the BBC, the Mail, Sun, Guardian whatever.
None are compulsory.
If they enrage you. Turn them off.
But, yes, Sunak is totally overrated, like Starmer. A ex-Goldman Sachs wide boy who married his fortune and doesn't care who he screws over to get to the top. I just hope he's found out sooner rather than later.
He's not quite as malevolent as Priti Patel, though, in fairness.
When you're flying and the oxygen mask drops the instruction is to always put your own mask on first before helping others.
I'm amazed by the authoritarian tendency on PB, from right and left.
I will tell you this now: chucking that guy in a US jail for 28 years will do him no good, nor the US no good.
It will make matters worse for both the individual and the country.
This is a terrible time for much of the world. Akin, as we have all discussed, to a global war
If you are really convinced we would scratch their back in their hour of need, but they would never return the favour. Fine.
But really you can’t do politics like that. You have always got to look to build partnership, because you don’t know what the future holds.
After we have helped ourselves.
The manufacturing we've paid for (that they haven't paid for) will still be there once our needs have been met.
“Cancel culture rarely survives a plague
Ideological mania can become too costly to maintain“
https://unherd.com/2021/01/after-a-plague-we-cant-afford-wokeness/
Boris has zilch choice, he has to say yes. Got to lift the gaze to future positions not gloat in the present.
Vaccinate ourselves, using the vaccine facilities we spent billions to set up, be able to lift restrictions and get back to work and then the facilities will be available to help others afterwards.
To leave ourselves in lockdown, to leave our elderly dying, in order to make a gesture to help others isn't "intellectual" it is purely egotistical gesturism. They will need hundreds of millions and we can provide as much as possible after we are up and running normally ourselves.
And if they did, they wouldn't last long.
There is good reason treason was one of the last Capital offences.
It isn't Authoritarianism. It is practicality.
“Leave ourselves in lockdown, with the elderly dying” your emotional man. That’s not good politics.
He has zilch choice, he has to say "yes, once we're done with the vaccine". Not before.
What you want is insane, it literally isn't possible. We can't fill their gap as we don't have what they need - we have what we need.
No problem helping once our order is complete
Because that is what they tried to do. Even if it wasn't centrally planned, or expertly thought through, if the mob had succeeded, Trump would have seized the reins of power, as the strongman returning order and restoring peace, and executed a Putin-style ninja-move on American democracy. Thus killing American democracy. I am still not sure if Trump expressly wanted this to happen, but I really really doubt he'd have been saddened if his and Giuliani's inflammatory words had enabled this to happen.
This helmet dude wasn't some random rioter in a Wal Mart in Arkansas. This was the Capitol, in DC. And his presence was clearly seditious.
In most countries in most eras he would now be legally executed, or dead already.
What logical, intellectual, fact-driven reason - as opposed to blind ideological emotions - is there to divert vaccines we have bought and paid for to give to other wealthy nations that haven't paid for their own and thought they could do it on the cheap?
What if it wasn’t vaccine? What if it was... potatoes.
(*I think he is an odious moron, a criminal and should be punished. I don't however agree that he should be given 28 years, lose his entire life in a US jail with no realistic chance of rehabilitation. You do. Tell me why.)
If it was potatoes and we had people starving and over a thousand people a day dying due to a lack of food - I would give the potatoes to our own citizens who are starving to death.
We don't have any spares.
What if they are literally desperate for the potatoes or it’s death, but we have signed legit contracts to import it out of their country to help us here?
Sedition?
Terrorism?
And the FBI have him in writing plotting the death of the politicians in the building at the time.
What more do you want for a treasonous terrorist to face justice?
Once we're no longer dying due to a lack of potatoes then share any excess we have with them. How can you ask more than that?
But sadly detracts from it by drawing conclusions wholly in excess of the evidence.
Unfortunately, he will neither hear my praise nor my reservations on an obscure website such as this one.
It's just.... not going to happen. Nor would it happen the other way. RIDIC.
• £10,000 fines per person for going to a wedding
• 28 years for breaking into a federal building
• Capital punishment for 'treason'
PB is really popular with authoritarians, of right and left. I think he should be sent to prison for 2-3 years, and given a genuine chance of rehabilitation.
I don't think throwing him in jail for the remainder of his adult life gives us any likelihood he will be rehabilitated. Indeed it probably removes all hope.
He will still be in jail, an old man, if he hasn't killed himself by then, in the 2040s.
Even if he is, would you advocate his spending the rest of his adult life in jail?
It's largely academic: no UK PM could possibly sanction delaying our vaccine rollout to help the EU, and we'd be unlikely to have enough spare capacity to make a meaningful dent in the EU population. By the time we have enough spare to help out, chances are so will they.
It will do no good - but they will probably not make an exception for him.
You know heaven and hell are exactly the same?
Identical in every regard, including the ten foot long chopsticks in the food hall.
It’s only in heaven you find the happier people, because they learnt in their lives of helping others because they can help you.
But the sentences they hand out are, as you say, barbaric, and I'm rather saddened that PBers are happy to support that barbarism because he's a political enemy.
Good night folks.
@Philip_Thompson, a poster I often vehemently disagree with, has replied below. I could expand, but I shan't. We aren't going to agree. And I need to sleep.
Sorry - they made their bed they need to lie in it
Now, if they had asked rather than threatened and had not already shown us time and time again their lack of good faith........
For armed violence that could have led to hundreds more if he'd got his way?
For armed violence that could have led to the overthrowing of democracy?
Attempted murder can carry a life sentence. That's what this was. They have written evidence he was planning to murder the politicians in the building. Life sentence unless paroled.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9194443/FOUR-members-family-died-Covid-met-Christmas-bubble.html
But he didn't. Another crucial element of punishment is DETERRENCE. And this becomes overriding in times of riot, sedition and insurrection, which is why judges are ALWAYS very severe on these crimes. The punishments have to be brutal and exemplary. That is what English judges did after the English riots, a year in jail for stealing water from a looted Tesco Extra. Sorry. But you did it. During nationwide looting and riot. You get a whole YEAR banged up. It was not normal shoplifting.
For a few weeks, liberals complained. They do not complain any more. Deterrence works. The riots have not recurred. The democratic state bared its teeth, and order prevailed.
This has to happen here: that is to say, in America, times ten. Democracy is worth more than any individual. So he will lose most of his life in prison? It is very sad for him. But also: tough shit.
By Donald Trump, the man they thought they were doing it for.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/capitol-rioters-prison-trump-executive-order-federal
Taking the positive - hospitalisations coming down
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jan/27/review-of-uk-workers-rights-post-brexit-is-axed-in-sudden-u-turn
https://twitter.com/Karl_Lauterbach/status/1354590747148906504
It's possible though there is no evidence of course.
Enrique Tarrio, 36, worked undercover exposing a human trafficking ring, and helped with drug and gambling cases, according to court documents.
Tarrio's documented involvement with law enforcement related to the period 2012 -2014. There was no evidence of him cooperating after that.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/27/far-right-proud-boy-leader-arrested-ahead-capitol-riots-revealed/
Black people over the age of 80 were half as likely as their white peers to have been vaccinated against Covid by 13 January, a large study suggests.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55832754
And - of course - she was brilliant in Spanglish.
"People of colour have been subject to institutionalised racism within the healthcare system," she said.
"We are five times more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act and four times more likely to die in childbirth.
Now given that we see never ending stories of people being turned away from hospitals with mental issues and then going on to suicide or commit crimes it seems odds that those detained are far more likely to be black as I know of no study that suggests black people are subject on balance to more mental illness. The child birth one is even more bizarre , we are saying your care from frontline health workers is dependent on skin colour. Considering we are constantly being told how many ethnic minorites we have working on the frontline of the health service it cant be down to white people treating non white people differently.
quotes from source https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/workforce-and-business/workforce-diversity/nhs-workforce/latest
77.9% of NHS staff were White (out of staff whose ethnicity was known), and 22.1% were from all other ethnic groups combined
people from each of the Asian, Chinese, Mixed and Other ethnic groups made up a larger percentage of medical staff than non-medical staff
a higher percentage of junior doctors than senior doctors were from the Black, Chinese and Mixed ethnic groups
Given I expect those that are non white not to have the prejudice that apparently white people have and given ethnic minorities are very much over represented in the health service 86.1% population for white british against 77.9% in the health service I am not sure how they can claim institutional racism unless they are saying the 22.9% are all uncle toms
"Gamestop: 'Failing' firm soars in value as amateurs buy stock"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55817918
some quotes
The Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (APMS) found that Black men were more likely than their White counterparts to experience a psychotic disorder in the last year.18
Risk of psychosis in Black Caribbean groups is estimated to be nearly seven times higher than in the White population.19
The impact of the higher rates of mental illness is that people from these groups are more likely than average to encounter mental health services.2
The latest APMS found no meaningful differences between Asian people and their White British counterparts in terms of experiencing psychotic disorders or common mental health problems.18
Those identifying as Asian or Asian British are one-third less likely to be in contact with mental health or learning disability services.20
There are some studies that suggest prevalence of mental ill-health (both common mental health problems and psychotic illness) is lower among Chinese people than their White British counterparts
Chinese people are underrepresented in mental health services, rates of admission to mental health inpatient facilities
Now I am not suggesting these are genetic by any means but when you have different measurements for different groups versus the white british control and all those groups are subject to the same "non white" bigotry then maybe it suggests there is more in play and it would benefit us more to find out what.
We already know some physical diseases show a particular preference amongst certain populations such a sickle cell anaemia, colour blindness etc. Does it not benefit us more to ask why these rates rather than just assume its institutional racism?
https://twitter.com/sputnikvaccine/status/1351825692342820864
https://twitter.com/sputnikvaccine/status/1354503000992215040?s=21
https://www.rte.ie/news/munster/2021/0121/1191246-football-waterford-wales/
A bunch of hedge funds made big bets that the price of GameStop would fall. They did this by finding people who had shares in it, and saying "excuse me, could I borrow your shares of GameStop, and I'll pay you interest to do so". After they borrowed the shares, they sold them.
The idea being that - in the future - they would buy the shares back at a lower price and sell them back.
This is known as "short selling".
GameStop is a failing firm, being destroyed by Amazon and digital distribution of games.
Hedge funds felt that betting on its shares going down in price was a sure thing.
However, a bunch of day traders realised that if they worked together they could engineer something called a "short squeeze", where the price of the shares would rise, and this would force the hedge funds to buy back (to "cover their shorts") at higher prices. And it's worked. The price of GameStop, which was something like $2.50 in the middle of last year, got up to $380 earlier today.
Some hedge funds hand lost hundreds of millions of dollars.
Quite a few day traders have made good money.
And the (current) price of GameStop is completely irrational. This is a loss making, sales falling, doomed business, that is currently worth about the same as the highly profitable, operates mobile phone networks in about 20 countries, Vodafone.
(Disclaimer: today the price of out the money calls on GameStop got so ridiculous, I decided to play too, and sold some myself.)
However, I also believe that there's nothing inconsistent in being sympathetic towards their situation, but not helping until we've spare capacity not needed to protect our own people. The British population has paid a heavy price for the missteps of the Government (and our bad luck with the new variant) already during this pandemic; now that our leadership has got something quite spectacularly right, the British people should not be expected to endure further suffering in order to try to bail out the entire EU. Which, as others have pointed out down thread, is both impossible politically (what Government could condemn its own people to death in large numbers to send aid to anyone abroad, let alone a wealthy bloc that has boobed *AND* some of whose leaders have taken to making threats,) and impossible in fact (being that the EU is ten times bigger than we are.)
The people of the EU will simply have to suffer for their institutional failings on vaccines, in the same way as we have suffered in other respects. It's shitty, but such is life - especially life in 2021.
Brilliant news.
Boris is handling this quite well at the moment but it's febrile.
It's quite ironic that the EU are arguing over vaccine supply of a product they still haven't managed to get themselves around to licensing.
One of the many, many, brilliant vaccine policies of this Gov't was to get the MHRA to start the regulatory process whilst data was still coming through, rather than like the EU who waited until the end of the trials before they began their seemingly endless committee process.
Everything that is so awful about the EU is being laid bare.