Attacker of Middle Eastern background, not known to security services. The second part is worrying which is probably why the terror threat level has been raised while any links are investigated.
Surprising given the speed with which three arrests were made.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Not sufficient to significantly inhibit a device presumably primed to kill many people at the remembrance ceremony. Watch the video, the initial explosion appears quite modest, and only turns serious once the car itself starts to catch fire. Strongly suggesting that the detonator exploded but failed to work.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Speculating on these things is always dangerous. But my hypothesis fits everything I have seen and heard so far:
The guy had a vest already timed to go off at 11, which he knew (hence why the driver reports seeing him trying to fiddle with it once they began to be held up in traffic). The target was the remembrance ceremony - presumably because of its obvious tie in to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - but the combination of timing, traffic, and road closures around the ceremony meant he wasn’t going to get there in time.
The Mail reports the taxi driver as having said that he then asked to be taken to the town centre, then changed his mind again and asked to be taken to the hospital when they were passing by. By this time the driver is suspicious and there are various reports that the passenger was then locked in. But the video shows the device going off before the taxi stops moving, and the driver gets out afterwards. Suggesting either a pre-timed detonation, or (if not already timed for 11 am) a passenger who realised he had been rumbled and expected to be shortly turned in, and an explosion that didn’t trigger the main device, hence the driver luckily and amazingly survived.
Let’s see what the news cycle reveals….
Sort of grim if the alleged bomber realised that he wasn't going to be able to get out of the vest before it exploded but asked to be taken to a hospital on the (slim) chance that they might be able to save him.
An almost comically charitable take.
I yield to your intimate familiarity with the mindset of a suicide bomber.
I most definitely yield to your sympathy for them.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Telegraph has a video. He was in the car then ran out, understandably dazed.
Just flashed up on my FB page, from the Telegraph. Yes, the Telegraph. "The equine business is being killed by Brexit,” Olympic gold medal-winning rider Nick Skelton told me last week. “It’s been catastrophic as far as the movement of horses to and from Europe is concerned.”
Goes on about lots of complaints about not being to move horses for races such as the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe. How will it affect Cheltenham in the future, especially if there's an on-going row over N. Ireland?
I can confirm that the costs to get horses to and from the EU are extraordinary and huge and didn't exist previously. For example, there is a roaring trade (for EU businesses and vets) taking empty horseboxes to RoI so that they can be certified as EU-compliant costing hundreds if not thousands of pounds at a time.
It's the same for European track days and competition in the lower echelons of motorsport. It's so expensive and difficult to get non-road registered cars and bikes into Europe that lots of people just aren't bothering. Still, who wants to ride Ricardo Tormo when you can go to Croft?
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Absolutely loved both Narcos and Narcos Mexico - sadly have watched both a few times!
I’ve tended to recommend people watch Narcos Mexico first as it puts a lot of Narcos Colombia Into perspective (even though Colombia was made first). The timeline for Mexico is also focussed earlier so when there is cross-over it makes more sense.
I found Colombia more “real” and Mexico had a more glossy soap opera feel - for example the female characters in Mexico are more glamorous and glossy. Wondered if it reflected a difference in culture if not tv culture of the Mexican soap opera style?
I know Mexico well and Narcos Mexico does not exaggerate the flashiness of rich gangsters there.
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
How significant is that, Presidential nominee-wise?
Mahoosive, he wins it, I suspect Betfair would (over)react and make him the favourite for the Dem nomination.
Texas and her 40 electoral votes for the Dems would be a game changer.
You can get 180 with Smarkets if you are quick.
Its gone already. All that's available now is 140 which I was tempted by as a trading bet but the lay odds are a thousand so its going to be tough to trade with it if there's no liquidity to lay off.
One for the election after next, perhaps. Winning Texas in 2022 will not leave much time to campaign for a White House run in 2023/4.
Attacker of Middle Eastern background, not known to security services. The second part is worrying which is probably why the terror threat level has been raised while any links are investigated.
Surprising given the speed with which three arrests were made.
Can only assume the address was linked to the taxi booking or pick-up point then?
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
He's been released from hospital so prognosis presumably excellent (apart from as you suggest a certain amount of trauma I guess).
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
If the explosion was behind the passenger seat that might help protect the driver, too.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
Doesn't have to be. Plenty of people are calm about their suicide because they have regained a sense of control; seeing that control tumble away from you could trigger a change in mind.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Absolutely loved both Narcos and Narcos Mexico - sadly have watched both a few times!
I’ve tended to recommend people watch Narcos Mexico first as it puts a lot of Narcos Colombia Into perspective (even though Colombia was made first). The timeline for Mexico is also focussed earlier so when there is cross-over it makes more sense.
I found Colombia more “real” and Mexico had a more glossy soap opera feel - for example the female characters in Mexico are more glamorous and glossy. Wondered if it reflected a difference in culture if not tv culture of the Mexican soap opera style?
I know Mexico well and Narcos Mexico does not exaggerate the flashiness of rich gangsters there.
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
Makes sense although I felt the production or maybe the lighting etc made it look more glossy too.
Mexico did provide one of my favourite tv scenes though where Don Neto is sitting by the sea listening to some Mexican version of Julio Iglesias on his Walkman and puffing away on some crack pipe whilst all around him everyone is being shot mercilessly!!
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
Doesn't have to be. Plenty of people are calm about their suicide because they have regained a sense of control; seeing that control tumble away from you could trigger a change in mind.
Attacker of Middle Eastern background, not known to security services. The second part is worrying which is probably why the terror threat level has been raised while any links are investigated.
Surprising given the speed with which three arrests were made.
Can only assume the address was linked to the taxi booking or pick-up point then?
That would be careless beyond belief since that link would still be there after a successful attack. I did wonder if the bomber's mobile phone survived the explosion but even then you'd expect burner phones to have been used. Surely most likely is the bomber and/or those arrested were already on the books of one agency or another, despite the denials.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
Doesn't have to be. Plenty of people are calm about their suicide because they have regained a sense of control; seeing that control tumble away from you could trigger a change in mind.
This is a suicide terrorist.
Not someone jumping off Beachy Head.
So?
If the terrorist thinks that blowing themselves up in a Remembrance Service is ordained as their righteous path, then suddenly that can't happen with the timer still ticking, you don't think that could cause them to panic and get fidgety?
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Absolutely loved both Narcos and Narcos Mexico - sadly have watched both a few times!
I’ve tended to recommend people watch Narcos Mexico first as it puts a lot of Narcos Colombia Into perspective (even though Colombia was made first). The timeline for Mexico is also focussed earlier so when there is cross-over it makes more sense.
I found Colombia more “real” and Mexico had a more glossy soap opera feel - for example the female characters in Mexico are more glamorous and glossy. Wondered if it reflected a difference in culture if not tv culture of the Mexican soap opera style?
I know Mexico well and Narcos Mexico does not exaggerate the flashiness of rich gangsters there.
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
Makes sense although I felt the production or maybe the lighting etc made it look more glossy too.
Mexico did provide one of my favourite tv scenes though where Don Neto is sitting by the sea listening to some Mexican version of Julio Iglesias on his Walkman and puffing away on some crack pipe whilst all around him everyone is being shot mercilessly!!
Yes, a brilliant scene
Have you done season 3 yet, and got to the bad cop turned good? What an incredible performance
How significant is that, Presidential nominee-wise?
Mahoosive, he wins it, I suspect Betfair would (over)react and make him the favourite for the Dem nomination.
Texas and her 40 electoral votes for the Dems would be a game changer.
You can get 180 with Smarkets if you are quick.
Its gone already. All that's available now is 140 which I was tempted by as a trading bet but the lay odds are a thousand so its going to be tough to trade with it if there's no liquidity to lay off.
One for the election after next, perhaps. Winning Texas in 2022 will not leave much time to campaign for a White House run in 2023/4.
Winning Texas for the Democrats and helping bring forward the swing of the electoral votes would be a big, solid base for a Presidential nomination.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
There is much more mispricing in politics than horses/footie and this is a good place to identify it. Most recently, lots of people made a packet in Chesham and Amersham at 20/1, tipped by the site owner.
I identified it as a good value loser, and cashed out a £5 bet for £6.20. Genius decision.
£1.20? Seriously? If I tell you which horse is going to win a hurdles race I would expect more than a five pound bet on it!
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course.
Correct me where I am wrong, you are saying there is money to be made betting against the market, where the market lacks knowledge?
on other hand this may not be completely right, yes if I am sure betting markets are wrong, it means I can bet against them. But not all bets against a market are smart ones, smartest bets are those where you work out who the winner is.When you know what is going to happen and why. And to do that you need to know something.
Is a media narrative founded in something that really matters? Is the media actually objective? If these answers no, it means not only you shouldn’t learn from media but they help you get political betting wrong.
Are opinion polls a measure of public opinion? Not necessarily. For starters it depends if they were scrupulously done to accurate measure of public opinion. And if set up fair are they answered honestly? Not if someone says they don’t know who to vote for despite knowing they will vote and for exactly who. Very honest with you, I done that myself? Sometimes I’m feeling okay to give an opinion sometimes I’m not.
to do good political bets you need to know something, but you can’t trust media or polls to give you that knowledge.
Credo in the Leicester 1 o'clock today?
3rd at 11/4. Beaten out of sight.
If I am sure of a winner this week I’ll tell you so you know how often I get it right.
Ooo yes please. But it has to be BEFORE the race if at all possible. 🙂
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
Polls aren't much use in predicting an election except in the final couple of weeks before polling day.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
Doesn't have to be. Plenty of people are calm about their suicide because they have regained a sense of control; seeing that control tumble away from you could trigger a change in mind.
This is a suicide terrorist.
Not someone jumping off Beachy Head.
So?
If the terrorist thinks that blowing themselves up in a Remembrance Service is ordained as their righteous path, then suddenly that can't happen with the timer still ticking, you don't think that could cause them to panic and get fidgety?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
It is also about realising that "the market" doesn't know any more than anyone else. It certainly doesn't know more than, say, PB. We should also trust ourselves I mean we talk about it every effing day so damn well should know more about it than random punters.
As for our new arrival @MoonRabbit, I am just shocked that coming to PB for the first time he/she didn't immediately find evidence of politics or betting. Shocked, I tell you.
Also waiting for an explanation of the hurdlers "hidden away at point to points" thing that they identified.
When I was reading it last week there was very little talk about betting or about politics at first. There was lots of talking about breaking news stories and Europe negotiations that I suppose is politics to be honest.
It’s true there are horses I have seen at point to point that I would like to bet on. They will be long odds when they race on a course, though likely steeplechase.
No I am not new. I was posting the other day on my phone when I was away at Cheltenham but then I couldn’t get it to work. This is working again now on my MacBook.
You said this:
"I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course."
And differs from your latest statement of "there are horses I have seen at point to point that I would like to bet on. They will be long odds when they race on a course, though likely steeplechase."
Which was the last point to point you went to?
What's a "point to point" ? Sorry if it's a stupid question.
So far from Moonrabbit all I've really heard is that he/she likes to bet on the nags. I think we should let him/her stay.
A point to point is an amateur horse race where the horses have to have a certificate from a (fox) hunt before they can take part. They are not allowed to take part in one without such a certificate, which is signed by the hunt.
It can be (especially in Ireland) a great stepping stone for National Hunt horses to race "under rules" - which means subject to more stringent rules for horse racing.
Our friend moonie is slightly mixing things up with how it all works.
Thanks for befriending me Topping 😻 I’m not called moonie I’m called Jade. Everything you have said is right except links to hunting are not obvious like that, my friends who don’t like hunting at all do come, and it’s not really a stepping stone to National Hunt either. It doesn’t mean a horse will ever race National Hunt even the really fast ones. It’s social but also it’s about being a spectacle. it’s called point to point but I think originally they raced between Steeples rather than points.
I havn’t been for two years, but coming from Yorkshire I have been to a lot. Look at this
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
I can't think of which crashes they were, but I have a feeling someone was unfortunate enough to be involved in two train crashes.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
Just flashed up on my FB page, from the Telegraph. Yes, the Telegraph. "The equine business is being killed by Brexit,” Olympic gold medal-winning rider Nick Skelton told me last week. “It’s been catastrophic as far as the movement of horses to and from Europe is concerned.”
Goes on about lots of complaints about not being to move horses for races such as the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe. How will it affect Cheltenham in the future, especially if there's an on-going row over N. Ireland?
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
No, but I think they'll storm the hetro and possibly gay elections though.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
There was also the guy, I think it was on QI, who survived Hiroshima, and went immediately to stay with relatives in Nagasaki. And lived to a ripe old age.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
Also, who is motivated to vote at all. Opposition voters want to give the government a kicking and persuade themselves that they can win next time (look, we beat them here). The floating/disengaged voters who actually decide elections probably can't be bothered to vote in large numbers.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
Murdoch (the bridge office on the Titanic when it hit the iceberg) was legendary in the merchant shipping trade for his ship handling on the Arabic, when she nearly collided with another ship. He countermanded the his superior, avoiding a collision by *inches* - you could have stepped from one ship to the other, without trouble....
Apparently there was a bit of a moment when some soldiers being rescued at Dunkirk found out that the skipper of the small boat in question was Lightroller.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
I can't think of which crashes they were, but I have a feeling someone was unfortunate enough to be involved in two train crashes.
Two nuclear bombs for this guy.
'Tsutomu Yamaguchi (山口 彊, Yamaguchi Tsutomu) (March 16, 1916 – January 4, 2010) was a Japanese marine engineer and a survivor of both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings during World War II..
Hiroshima bombing The explosion ruptured his eardrums, blinded him temporarily, and left him with serious radiation burns over the left side of the top half of his body.
Nagasaki bombing His workplace again put him 3 km from ground zero, but this time he was unhurt by the explosion. However, he was unable to replace his now ruined bandages and he suffered from a high fever and continuous vomiting for over a week.'
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
If the explosion was behind the passenger seat that might help protect the driver, too.
Suggestion seems to be that the detonator went off but not the device itself. He's still bloody lucky but had the device exploded as opposed to caught fire he would have been dead.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
Also, who is motivated to vote at all. Opposition voters want to give the government a kicking and persuade themselves that they can win next time (look, we beat them here). The floating/disengaged voters who actually decide elections probably can't be bothered to vote in large numbers.
Turnout is usually lower, often much lower. Not invariably, of course.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
I can't think of which crashes they were, but I have a feeling someone was unfortunate enough to be involved in two train crashes.
There was a child in America who survived a plane crash that killed his mom, brother and sister only to then survive a second plane crash years later that claimed the life of his dad and stepmom.
The estimated odds of surviving two plane crashes that claim the lives of multiple people is one in more than a quadrillion.
Talking of betting, anyone who has read anything I've written about boxing bets (ie no one) will know that no matter who I think will win, I quite regularly bet on the long outsider because no matter how good someone is supposed to be and how "sure" they are to win, it is still within a punch to upset the odds.
I backed Kiko Martinez for example on Saturday at 19s (bf) to beat Kid Galahad. And for five rounds I was the biggest fool in town. And then Kaboom. He decked Galahad and that was my most successful bet of the year.
Mine was Pedro Acosta to be Moto3 champion at 16/1. I might have tipped it on here; I can't recall. It just about paid for my new GSX-R.
The bookies are incredibly bad at setting odds on motorcycle racing in general. They are obviously just working off recent form and don't really understand what's a Yamaha track or a Ducati track, etc.
They used to be similarly bad at odds setting for pro cycling but have greatly improved in recent years as it got popular in the UK.
You did tip it here - back in April - I remember - see below.
For some reason I didn't back it. Couldn't find the market I think.
" You can still get 16/1 on Pedro Acosta to win the Moto3 championship which are absurd odds considering how dominant he has been over the first three races. You're basically betting that he won't injure himself in way that keeps him out for 2-3 races."
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
Kate Winslett?
Charles Lightoller, the Second Officer, took his small boat to Dunkirk. He was the inspiration for the Mark Rylance character in the recent movie about the evacuation.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Absolutely loved both Narcos and Narcos Mexico - sadly have watched both a few times!
I’ve tended to recommend people watch Narcos Mexico first as it puts a lot of Narcos Colombia Into perspective (even though Colombia was made first). The timeline for Mexico is also focussed earlier so when there is cross-over it makes more sense.
I found Colombia more “real” and Mexico had a more glossy soap opera feel - for example the female characters in Mexico are more glamorous and glossy. Wondered if it reflected a difference in culture if not tv culture of the Mexican soap opera style?
I know Mexico well and Narcos Mexico does not exaggerate the flashiness of rich gangsters there.
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
Makes sense although I felt the production or maybe the lighting etc made it look more glossy too.
Mexico did provide one of my favourite tv scenes though where Don Neto is sitting by the sea listening to some Mexican version of Julio Iglesias on his Walkman and puffing away on some crack pipe whilst all around him everyone is being shot mercilessly!!
Yes, a brilliant scene
Have you done season 3 yet, and got to the bad cop turned good? What an incredible performance
Yes - have rarely seen an actor manage to convey such a range of character facets. The development in his story and how he portrays it was some of the best acting I have seen. Just subtle but perfect. I really didn’t know which way he was going to go or where he was really coming from but it built so well.
Edit - would love them to make a series about Checo’s building of the New York business for the Cali Cartel as he was a great character too.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Turnout in mid-term is much lower, opposition voters will normally be more motivated to vote, so might not reflect any individual voters voting differently.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
If there had only been one non Tory candidate they might have won a la Martin Bell in Tatton.
As it is there will be a Labour as well as LD candidate and it is a strong Leave area so even if the Tory majority falls it is unlikely the LDs will actually win it
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Portugese period spy drama "Gloria" is good on Netflix. Watched it with English subtitle but it is available with dubbed English. Lots of old seventies British made cars.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
Kate Winslett?
Charles Lightoller, the Second Officer, took his small boat to Dunkirk. He was the inspiration for the Mark Rylance character in the recent movie about the evacuation.
Apparently some soldiers weren't impressed that he was in charge of the boat they were on - until someone pointed out that he did have proven skills in surviving disasters.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
I understand, but the pattern is give government majority, give them lots of disapproval, then give them another majority or even bigger one. To me that doesn’t make sense. Is it just me?
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
I understand, but the pattern is give government majority, give them lots of disapproval, then give them another majority or even bigger one. To me that doesn’t make sense. Is it just me?
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Absolutely loved both Narcos and Narcos Mexico - sadly have watched both a few times!
I’ve tended to recommend people watch Narcos Mexico first as it puts a lot of Narcos Colombia Into perspective (even though Colombia was made first). The timeline for Mexico is also focussed earlier so when there is cross-over it makes more sense.
I found Colombia more “real” and Mexico had a more glossy soap opera feel - for example the female characters in Mexico are more glamorous and glossy. Wondered if it reflected a difference in culture if not tv culture of the Mexican soap opera style?
I know Mexico well and Narcos Mexico does not exaggerate the flashiness of rich gangsters there.
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
Makes sense although I felt the production or maybe the lighting etc made it look more glossy too.
Mexico did provide one of my favourite tv scenes though where Don Neto is sitting by the sea listening to some Mexican version of Julio Iglesias on his Walkman and puffing away on some crack pipe whilst all around him everyone is being shot mercilessly!!
Yes, a brilliant scene
Have you done season 3 yet, and got to the bad cop turned good? What an incredible performance
Yes - have rarely seen an actor manage to convey such a range of character facets. The development in his story and how he portrays it was some of the best acting I have seen. Just subtle but perfect. I really didn’t know which way he was going to go or where he was really coming from but it built so well.
Edit - would love them to make a series about Checo’s building of the New York business for the Cali Cartel as he was a great character too.
Some backstory on that brilliant actor. Luis Mendez
Yes it’s mad Netflix aren’t pursuing more storylines - going to NYC would be a great spin off. Maybe the series is a commercial failure albeit a critical success? But that seems unlikely. Odd
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
There was also the guy, I think it was on QI, who survived Hiroshima, and went immediately to stay with relatives in Nagasaki. And lived to a ripe old age.
Hemingway, 2 plane crashes one day. Talk about feeding the legend.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
It is also about realising that "the market" doesn't know any more than anyone else. It certainly doesn't know more than, say, PB. We should also trust ourselves I mean we talk about it every effing day so damn well should know more about it than random punters.
As for our new arrival @MoonRabbit, I am just shocked that coming to PB for the first time he/she didn't immediately find evidence of politics or betting. Shocked, I tell you.
Also waiting for an explanation of the hurdlers "hidden away at point to points" thing that they identified.
When I was reading it last week there was very little talk about betting or about politics at first. There was lots of talking about breaking news stories and Europe negotiations that I suppose is politics to be honest.
It’s true there are horses I have seen at point to point that I would like to bet on. They will be long odds when they race on a course, though likely steeplechase.
No I am not new. I was posting the other day on my phone when I was away at Cheltenham but then I couldn’t get it to work. This is working again now on my MacBook.
You said this:
"I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course."
And differs from your latest statement of "there are horses I have seen at point to point that I would like to bet on. They will be long odds when they race on a course, though likely steeplechase."
Which was the last point to point you went to?
What's a "point to point" ? Sorry if it's a stupid question.
So far from Moonrabbit all I've really heard is that he/she likes to bet on the nags. I think we should let him/her stay.
A point to point is an amateur horse race where the horses have to have a certificate from a (fox) hunt before they can take part. They are not allowed to take part in one without such a certificate, which is signed by the hunt.
It can be (especially in Ireland) a great stepping stone for National Hunt horses to race "under rules" - which means subject to more stringent rules for horse racing.
Our friend moonie is slightly mixing things up with how it all works.
Thanks for befriending me Topping 😻 I’m not called moonie I’m called Jade. Everything you have said is right except links to hunting are not obvious like that, my friends who don’t like hunting at all do come, and it’s not really a stepping stone to National Hunt either. It doesn’t mean a horse will ever race National Hunt even the really fast ones. It’s social but also it’s about being a spectacle. it’s called point to point but I think originally they raced between Steeples rather than points.
I havn’t been for two years, but coming from Yorkshire I have been to a lot. Look at this
So apart from the meeting being called the XYZ Hunt Point to Point Meeting, and the horses having to have a certificate signed by the Hunt, and there being a parade of the Hunt hounds, and there being a Members [of the Hunt] and an adjacent [to the Hunt] race, and that the meeting raises money for the hunt. the links to hunting are not obvious. OK.
And it certainly doesn't mean a horse will ever "race National Hunt" as I said it can be such a stepping stone, especially in Ireland. Perhaps for "the really fast ones", a description I have heard precisely zero times in relation to racing.
But anyway that's enough time spent by me on this chat. Happy PB posting Jade.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
The LDs partly ran the country from 2010-2015, resulting in their worst general election performance since 1970 in 2015
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
The LDs partly ran the country from 2010-2015, resulting in their worst general election performance since 1970 in 2015
By similar logic, would he support an invasion of Greece by Turkey to reunite the Ottoman Empire?
You made him look silly William lol
But the point is they have Chinese history but don’t like Chinese politics! I think you will find this man is being paid by the Chinese to say this. In Hong Kong they have known for a long time who were saying things like this were being paid lots by the Chinese.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
It’s not just a very entertaining drama, it also explains how the narcotics industry got so powerful, parasitising entire nations - Mexico, Colombia
Game of Thrones is a hoot, the first 3-4 seasons of Mad Men are excellent (but the later ones much poorer)
Absolutely loved both Narcos and Narcos Mexico - sadly have watched both a few times!
I’ve tended to recommend people watch Narcos Mexico first as it puts a lot of Narcos Colombia Into perspective (even though Colombia was made first). The timeline for Mexico is also focussed earlier so when there is cross-over it makes more sense.
I found Colombia more “real” and Mexico had a more glossy soap opera feel - for example the female characters in Mexico are more glamorous and glossy. Wondered if it reflected a difference in culture if not tv culture of the Mexican soap opera style?
I know Mexico well and Narcos Mexico does not exaggerate the flashiness of rich gangsters there.
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
Makes sense although I felt the production or maybe the lighting etc made it look more glossy too.
Mexico did provide one of my favourite tv scenes though where Don Neto is sitting by the sea listening to some Mexican version of Julio Iglesias on his Walkman and puffing away on some crack pipe whilst all around him everyone is being shot mercilessly!!
Yes, a brilliant scene
Have you done season 3 yet, and got to the bad cop turned good? What an incredible performance
Yes - have rarely seen an actor manage to convey such a range of character facets. The development in his story and how he portrays it was some of the best acting I have seen. Just subtle but perfect. I really didn’t know which way he was going to go or where he was really coming from but it built so well.
Edit - would love them to make a series about Checo’s building of the New York business for the Cali Cartel as he was a great character too.
Some backstory on that brilliant actor. Luis Mendez
Yes it’s mad Netflix aren’t pursuing more storylines - going to NYC would be a great spin off. Maybe the series is a commercial failure albeit a critical success? But that seems unlikely. Odd
I’ve just checked IMDB and season 3 got more negative feedback than the others. Complaints about the voiceover (which was clunky) and a meandering or unconvincing plot (a bit unfair, they are following real life so it’s hard)
Still a brilliant series overall. Hope Netflix can make something as good very soon
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
I understand, but the pattern is give government majority, give them lots of disapproval, then give them another majority or even bigger one. To me that doesn’t make sense. Is it just me?
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
Interesting. I am keeping out for now. I don't think it is clear:
It's a massive Tory majority in a seat where LD came nowhere; so why LD and not Lab?
Are there issues, political or cultural, which mean the LDs have a real handle?
Paterson isn't standing, the Tory candidate appears not to be a slime ball.
It's a Brexit seat, and a major agricultural centre.
Nothing in the current odds is attractive enough. Both LD and Lab have an outside chance as of this moment. I don't think there is any constituency data which clarifies the question.
I would back LDs/Lab at more like 15s or 20s. I think the Tories will probably win, but further data might change that view.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
If that doesn't get you on some sort of watchlist . . .
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
I understand, but the pattern is give government majority, give them lots of disapproval, then give them another majority or even bigger one. To me that doesn’t make sense. Is it just me?
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Never bet on the result you want to happen. If you win it is consolation, and if you lose you don’t care as much.
There is also the point that you are more likely to spot value that way.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Never bet on the result you want to happen. If you win it is consolation, and if you lose you don’t care as much.
There is also the point that you are more likely to spot value that way.
Yep - always bet on a 0-0 draw in football - at least then there is a consolation if the match is boring.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
I understand, but the pattern is give government majority, give them lots of disapproval, then give them another majority or even bigger one. To me that doesn’t make sense. Is it just me?
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
You can get 7/2 with William Hill. Golden rule: always take the best odds. (You may get even better on the exchanges.)
Thanks for the tip! I have the Paddy Power app. This may be where some bookies better for different types of betting?
If you want to be a serious punter, you must have accounts with all bookies and exchanges to efficiently seek the best odds. Unfortunately, I have four trad book who limit my stakes to paltry sums.
On the subject of nimbyism (which we were discussing, ooh, sometime) I've just come across this. Watch the first 45 seconds to get the general feel, then skip to 3 minutes for the best bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUVJ2ur_oMQ
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Never bet on the result you want to happen. If you win it is consolation, and if you lose you don’t care as much.
There is also the point that you are more likely to spot value that way.
Yep - always bet on a 0-0 draw in football - at least then there is a consolation if the match is boring.
But it has a downside. You can lose in the first 5 seconds but not win. And you can lose in the last second, but not win.
Boring matches would more interesting if you backed the team/person to score the last goal of the match, as every moment is potentially significant.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Never bet on the result you want to happen. If you win it is consolation, and if you lose you don’t care as much.
There is also the point that you are more likely to spot value that way.
This tactic is quite a winner this year for supporters of Carlisle United.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
Would you keep the breastydumplings in this fantasy one of yours?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
If he was wrong nearly every time then you could have cleaned up by betting on the other horse.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
one way to lose money long term on betfair was to bet on the 1.01 "winner" as the winner comes home.
The bets have a habit of losing more than 1% of the time.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
Comments
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfbudhP4Jsc
Viral by Alina Chan and Matt Ridley review — Did Covid-19 leak from a Chinese lab?
This is no longer a crazy theory, says Tom Chivers. The authors have some damning evidence for their lab-leak hypothesis
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/viral-by-alina-chan-and-matt-ridley-review-did-covid-19-leak-from-a-chinese-lab-s7hqgkdmf (£££)
And Mexico is simply a richer country, tho both are relatively poor - $8,300 GDP per cap versus $5,300
Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility.
Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging.
Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
Mexico did provide one of my favourite tv scenes though where Don Neto is sitting by the sea listening to some Mexican version of Julio Iglesias on his Walkman and puffing away on some crack pipe whilst all around him everyone is being shot mercilessly!!
Not someone jumping off Beachy Head.
He warns the government is "close to losing the benefit of the doubt" and warns of "a gradual and then sudden decline into defeat"
Bold talk from a payroll MP...
https://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2021/11/bim-afolami-the-government-is-close-to-losing-the-benefit-of-the-doubt.html https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1460261293877833732/photo/1
If the terrorist thinks that blowing themselves up in a Remembrance Service is ordained as their righteous path, then suddenly that can't happen with the timer still ticking, you don't think that could cause them to panic and get fidgety?
Have you done season 3 yet, and got to the bad cop turned good? What an incredible performance
I havn’t been for two years, but coming from Yorkshire I have been to a lot. Look at this
https://www.racingfixtures.co.uk/point2point/yorkshire
Weren't there a few people who survived the Titanic then ended up in other disasters too?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bim_Afolami
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
How disappointing. It’s the last great TV drama
Apparently there was a bit of a moment when some soldiers being rescued at Dunkirk found out that the skipper of the small boat in question was Lightroller.
'Tsutomu Yamaguchi (山口 彊, Yamaguchi Tsutomu) (March 16, 1916 – January 4, 2010) was a Japanese marine engineer and a survivor of both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings during World War II..
Hiroshima bombing
The explosion ruptured his eardrums, blinded him temporarily, and left him with serious radiation burns over the left side of the top half of his body.
Nagasaki bombing
His workplace again put him 3 km from ground zero, but this time he was unhurt by the explosion. However, he was unable to replace his now ruined bandages and he suffered from a high fever and continuous vomiting for over a week.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsutomu_Yamaguchi
The estimated odds of surviving two plane crashes that claim the lives of multiple people is one in more than a quadrillion.
https://johnolearyinspires.com/podcast/archive/austin-hatch-312/
Edit - would love them to make a series about Checo’s building of the New York business for the Cali Cartel as he was a great character too.
Jeez
As it is there will be a Labour as well as LD candidate and it is a strong Leave area so even if the Tory majority falls it is unlikely the LDs will actually win it
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
https://www.paddypower.com/politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Jessop
Was on the Titanic's two sister ships (and the Titanic as well) with a collision on one and sinking of the other.
Beeboids let them spout on unchallenged about Tibet being part of "One China", and did not even challenge their standing, nor ask pointed questions.
CCG is a member of an alliance of think tanks, coordinated by the International Liaison Department of the Chinese Communist Party, that support the Belt and Road Initiative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_China_and_Globalization
https://www.archyde.com/the-truth-about-the-weight-gain-of-luis-gerardo-mendez-for-the-role-of-victor-tapia-in-narcos-mexico-netflix-series-nnda-nnlt-shows/
Yes it’s mad Netflix aren’t pursuing more storylines - going to NYC would be a great spin off. Maybe the series is a commercial failure albeit a critical success? But that seems unlikely. Odd
So apart from the meeting being called the XYZ Hunt Point to Point Meeting, and the horses having to have a certificate signed by the Hunt, and there being a parade of the Hunt hounds, and there being a Members [of the Hunt] and an adjacent [to the Hunt] race, and that the meeting raises money for the hunt. the links to hunting are not obvious. OK.
And it certainly doesn't mean a horse will ever "race National Hunt" as I said it can be such a stepping stone, especially in Ireland. Perhaps for "the really fast ones", a description I have heard precisely zero times in relation to racing.
But anyway that's enough time spent by me on this chat. Happy PB posting Jade.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
But the point is they have Chinese history but don’t like Chinese politics! I think you will find this man is being paid by the Chinese to say this. In Hong Kong they have known for a long time who were saying things like this were being paid lots by the Chinese.
Do you know anything about Jackson Pollock?
Still a brilliant series overall. Hope Netflix can make something as good very soon
It's a massive Tory majority in a seat where LD came nowhere; so why LD and not Lab?
Are there issues, political or cultural, which mean the LDs have a real handle?
Paterson isn't standing, the Tory candidate appears not to be a slime ball.
It's a Brexit seat, and a major agricultural centre.
Nothing in the current odds is attractive enough. Both LD and Lab have an outside chance as of this moment. I don't think there is any constituency data which clarifies the question.
I would back LDs/Lab at more like 15s or 20s. I think the Tories will probably win, but further data might change that view.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went?
Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
There is also the point that you are more likely to spot value that way.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUVJ2ur_oMQ
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Boring matches would more interesting if you backed the team/person to score the last goal of the match, as every moment is potentially significant.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
The bets have a habit of losing more than 1% of the time.