New Zealand will make household contacts of Covid cases isolate for 24 days under harsh new rules brought in to combat an impending Omicron outbreak.
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has brought in the strict measures as the country battles to stay Covid Zero despite the threat of the highly contagious mutant strain.
But critics say the lengthy quarantine period is 'unworkable' and will lead people to avoid getting tested.
I feel bad but I couldn't help but laugh at reading 24 days. I do feel sorry for the ordinary New Zealander who will suffer, but it's just such a ridiculous response.
Diplomats are sometimes sneered at. I don't envy our people in Moscow though. Dealing with what appears on the surface to be the entitled, self pitying whining of kleptocrats who've enriched themselves under Putin and nurse a ludicrous grievance against the western world where they nonetheless like to stash their money. It must try the patience of a saint not least having to continually show respect and not seem to be condescending towards them.
It would be far beyond me to keep calm. I'd probably try to choke someone within about an hour and have to be bayonetted by the Presidential Guard.
So we’ve now reached the point where the Chief Whip is tweeting public denials on a Saturday night, then frantically delete them 10 minutes later. All as the letters to the ‘22 start going in. The whole thing is falling apart. https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1485017391058894853
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
Why? He's got a decent chance of keeping his seat and he'll be able to sleep at nigh. What more could he want?
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
I also note today that PB's elite team of armchair warriors, having given up for now on China invading Taiwan or the UK invading France, are, in the immortal words of Kenny Everett, in "let's bomb Russia" mode. And they want Germany to join in, regardless of the perilous history that has given rise to Germany's caution in respect of military adventurism. Hm.
Yes, I'd forgotten that he also said "let's kick Michael Foot's stick away". Thatcher thought that was hilarious.
That was of course the election where the SDP under Roy Jenkins almost overtook Foot's Labour, getting 25% to Labour's 27% and Thatcher's Tories got 42% and won 397 seats and a landslide majority of 144.
If it was ever going to be safe for a celebrity to mock a Labour leader it was with Foot in 1983, even more so than Corbyn in 2019
Progressive Alliance got 52% of the vote back then, 10 points more than the Tories.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
Why? He's got a decent chance of keeping his seat and he'll be able to sleep at nigh. What more could he want?
I wouldn't entirely discount the possibility that TP knows what he is doing, believes in what he is doing, and means what he says.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
The Conservatives are up to their necks in it, but that doesn't take away from the fact that in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable. Kudos to Boris for this, or whoever is actually running the show.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
Why? He's got a decent chance of keeping his seat and he'll be able to sleep at nigh. What more could he want?
I wouldn't entirely discount the possibility that TP knows what he is doing, believes in what he is doing, and means what he says.
Boris, do not ask for who the Bell tolls, it tolls for thee.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
The film is great. It’s just that it’s not the book & that gets book fans knickers in a twist.
It’s a satire of war propaganda & the militaristic fascism that the book (sort of) celebrates. A commentary in part on contemporary Hollywood’s hand in glove cosying up to the CIA & the US military. If you can’t see that the film is satirising fascist propaganda then I suggest that your media literaracy really needs some polishing up, because Verhoevan really wasn’t subtle about it.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
And not publishing the unredacted Russia Report, or serious action on its recommendations.
Johnsons own history with Russia is quite an interesting read.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
In both the book and, it happens in the film, genocide is specifically ruled out as a tactic.
Because Space Fascism that simply consisted of smashing planets would be really anodyne looking..... What was the line, in another film- "Candy Coated Armageddon"?
So we’ve now reached the point where the Chief Whip is tweeting public denials on a Saturday night, then frantically delete them 10 minutes later. All as the letters to the ‘22 start going in. The whole thing is falling apart. https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1485017391058894853
Thank goodness we still have professional civil servants to keep the show on the road while politicians sort out their differences.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
That I think will depend on whether his successor wants Red Wall votes from MPs and constituents.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
Why? He's got a decent chance of keeping his seat and he'll be able to sleep at nigh. What more could he want?
I wouldn't entirely discount the possibility that TP knows what he is doing, believes in what he is doing, and means what he says.
Yes, I think the brave ones have already got their letters in. The rest are waiting for the cover of Sue Gray's report which, although it won't really tell us anything we don't already know, will enable them to say they gave BJ every chance to be 'officially' exonerated - which he won't be. The report will be studiously non-committal; us ex-civil servants know how to write it. But I could be wrong, as I often am.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
Starship Troopers is hardly an anti-war film. Indeed few films are so enthusiastic for it!
The main protagonists in the film come from Argentina. I am a fan of the film, but Verhoevans films are always interesting. Even Showgirls, which has developed into Cult status.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
Well, the "fluff" I wrote is formally the same argument I would make for the justice of our involvement in fighting the Nazis. I would be interested to know whether you think that was a good fight for us to be in, and, if so, how your justification for that differs from mine. Genuinely, I think it's incumbent on anyone who has an opinion about this one way or another to consider carefully on what grounds you would sanction military action.
i think the Nazis wanted to take over Europe not just a bit of it . They were clearly racists and extreme ones as well. The big difference though is that the nazis did not have nuclear weapons that could destroy the west within two days
Sadly, the people at the heart of the Russian state are racists and extremists too.
Also, Putin has a "Eurasian" strategy which deserves some in-depth reading if you want to grasp the threat Russia poses. This concept predates Putin's time as Russian leader but has accelerated under him, and in particular in the last decade or so.
Nuclear weapons change the strategic calculations, but frankly, if we really think that Russia would resort to using nuclear weapons in response to it being repelled outside its own borders then the world is already in a lot more trouble than many realise. And Putin hasn't shown any evidence of being suicidal.
I do wonder where Putin's fortune is currently stored.
A few years ago there was a lot of tracing of assets he was thought to own via the Paradise Papers and so on.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
Why? He's got a decent chance of keeping his seat and he'll be able to sleep at nigh. What more could he want?
I wouldn't entirely discount the possibility that TP knows what he is doing, believes in what he is doing, and means what he says.
I couldn't agree with you more. I met him once campaigning for Nick and he struck me as serious and conscientious. The antithesis I imagine of your average Boris supporting Tory
BREAKING: The UK has accused Russia of plotting to install a pro-Kremlin leader in Kyiv as Moscow weighs up new Ukraine invasion. In an unusual move based on declassified intelligence, the foreign office alleged an ex Ukrainian MP was “being considered as a potential candidate” https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1485020617539735561
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
The film is great. It’s just that it’s not the book & that gets book fans knickers in a twist.
It’s a satire of war propaganda & the militaristic fascism that the book (sort of) celebrates. A commentary in part on contemporary Hollywood’s hand in glove cosying up to the CIA & the US military. If you can’t see that the film is satirising fascist propaganda then I suggest that your media literaracy really needs some polishing up, because Verhoevan really wasn’t subtle about it.
For the same themes, actually making The Forever War would have done a better job. That's why Haldeman wrote it in the first place!
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
The Conservatives are up to their necks in it, but that doesn't take away from the fact that in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable. Kudos to Boris for this, or whoever is actually running the show.
You say: "in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable". I say: in matters of geo-politics, 'recent weeks' count for little, because it's often too late. We used to call it foreign policy - having a consistent line on our friends and foes for years on end, not just recent weeks.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
Starship Troopers is hardly an anti-war film. Indeed few films are so enthusiastic for it!
The main protagonists in the film come from Argentina. I am a fan of the film, but Verhoevans films are always interesting. Even Showgirls, which has developed into Cult status.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
Starship Troopers is hardly an anti-war film. Indeed few films are so enthusiastic for it!
The main protagonists in the film come from Argentina. I am a fan of the film, but Verhoevans films are always interesting. Even Showgirls, which has developed into Cult status.
You do realise that "It iz a sumwot labud sattire" as T. K. Nupton phrased it in his seminal work on late nineteenth-century literature?
The hero of the film seemed awfully... er... Aryan for Argentina. Perhaps he was an orphan brought up by foster parents, and visited by Sir Laurence Olivier?
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Hymn, or extended piss take ?
The thing is with Verhoevan, it is always hard to be sure, just look at his other films. Both Black Book and Soldier of Orange are quite morally ambiguous, and is Robocop satirical?
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
The Forever War is a far better book. Haldeman was a good writer. Mindbridge and All My Sins Remembered are good reads as well
It is to Heinlein's credit that when Forever War came out, he turned up at the next big science fiction convention, handing out copies, practically demanding people vote for it as the best book of the year.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
He is putting conscience and decency before political expediency, which is a good thing.
Michael Fabricant @Mike_Fabricant A former minister who had been plotting against #Boris for some time now suddenly blames her sacking on #Islamophobia when (a) there are many excellent Muslim ministers in the Government and (b) she was nice but unimaginative and mediocre.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
The Conservatives are up to their necks in it, but that doesn't take away from the fact that in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable. Kudos to Boris for this, or whoever is actually running the show.
You say: "in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable". I say: in matters of geo-politics, 'recent weeks' count for little, because it's often too late. We used to call it foreign policy - having a consistent line on our friends and foes for years on end, not just recent weeks.
The UK government has fairly consistently been opposing Russian actions since before Cameron got the job. Occasionally you get people claiming that because we haven't tried to nuke Moscow or something we are being soft on them, but it's actually been a fairly consistent policy.
Keir Starmer @Keir_Starmer · 54m This is shocking to read, the Conservatives must investigate immediately. Solidarity with @Nus_Ghani for your bravery in speaking out.
There’s report after report of appalling behaviour and lack of respect at the centre of this government.
Michael Fabricant @Mike_Fabricant A former minister who had been plotting against #Boris for some time now suddenly blames her sacking on #Islamophobia when (a) there are many excellent Muslim ministers in the Government and (b) she was nice but unimaginative and mediocre.
In an alternative universe, Michael Fabricant calls someone else unimaginative and mediocre.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
Starship Troopers is hardly an anti-war film. Indeed few films are so enthusiastic for it!
The main protagonists in the film come from Argentina. I am a fan of the film, but Verhoevans films are always interesting. Even Showgirls, which has developed into Cult status.
The film satirises pro-war armchair warriorhood!
But I'm more of a Total Recall man, personally.
Zwartboek was intriguing as well.
Dick's short story "We can remember it for you wholesale" on which Total Recall was based had a much better twist to it, but Bladerunner was a far better version of the story than the original "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep"
Weird observation, but kind of nuts to see three Western European KINGDOMS (Britain, Spain & the Netherlands) standing up for Ukraine’s republic against an aggressive tyrant while the two most powerful REPUBLICS (France & Germany) sit it out or actively undermine NATO response
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
The Conservatives are up to their necks in it, but that doesn't take away from the fact that in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable. Kudos to Boris for this, or whoever is actually running the show.
You say: "in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable". I say: in matters of geo-politics, 'recent weeks' count for little, because it's often too late. We used to call it foreign policy - having a consistent line on our friends and foes for years on end, not just recent weeks.
The UK government has fairly consistently been opposing Russian actions since before Cameron got the job. Occasionally you get people claiming that because we haven't tried to nuke Moscow or something we are being soft on them, but it's actually been a fairly consistent policy.
The Ukrainians trace the hardening of the UK’s stance to the poisoning of Litvinenko, leaving a trail of Polonium across London…then came Salisbury…
The Sunday Times have reported that I have submitted a letter to the Chair of the 1922 Committee.
When I was asked about this by the Sunday Times, I gave them the same answer that I have given constituents who have written to me, namely that I do not intend to comment on what is an internal and confidential process within the Parliamentary party.
In the interests of being open with my constituents, it is no secret at Westminster that I have been unhappy about many aspects of the Number 10 operation. I have been quite open with the whips and earlier this week I spoke plainly to the Prime Minister about my concerns.
Like many colleagues, I am now awaiting the report being prepared by Sue Gray into "parties" at Downing Street, and the subsequent statement the Prime Minister has promised to make. I do not intend to comment further on this issue until after that report is published.
Boris agreed to an Islamophobia probe during the leadership hustings.
Junked of course, like every promise he’s ever made.
It looks like there's one huge bull loose in the china shop that used to be the Tory Party It's almost certainly Dom but this is so well calibrated there must be someone on the inside. Govey perhaps?
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
The Conservatives are up to their necks in it, but that doesn't take away from the fact that in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable. Kudos to Boris for this, or whoever is actually running the show.
You say: "in recent weeks the government's stance has been admirable". I say: in matters of geo-politics, 'recent weeks' count for little, because it's often too late. We used to call it foreign policy - having a consistent line on our friends and foes for years on end, not just recent weeks.
The UK government has fairly consistently been opposing Russian actions since before Cameron got the job. Occasionally you get people claiming that because we haven't tried to nuke Moscow or something we are being soft on them, but it's actually been a fairly consistent policy.
The Ukrainians trace the hardening of the UK’s stance to the poisoning of Litvinenko, leaving a trail of Polonium across London…then came Salisbury…
Long before that there were sanctions (limited, true) and condemnation from the UK over, for example, Chechnya.
Boris agreed to an Islamophobia probe during the leadership hustings.
Junked of course, like every promise he’s ever made.
It looks like there's one huge bull loose in the china shop that used to be the Tory Party It's almost certainly Dom but this is so well calibrated there must be someone on the inside. Govey perhaps?
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
The Forever War is a far better book.
Tends to come in a collection with Forever Free and Forever Peace thesedays, which...are not good books however.
Speculated before on how the bit in Forever War where the protagonists finds society has developed into one which finds heterosexuality practically taboo is considered thesedays.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
What I find remarkable is that there were people at the time who thought the movie Starship Troopers was meant to be taken po facedly seriously. I mean come on, a scene of lousy propaganda of kids stamping on bugs and a grouchy person going 'The only good bug is a dead bug' to camera? As noted above the Director sure ain't subtle.
There's no way it was serious, and that's part of its appeal.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Starship Troopers the book lauds a society with two levels of citizenry where true citizenship only comes from the sacrifice of blood.
All justified with the "unarguable" moral calculus.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
Blazing Saddles anyone?
Not seen the stories as I don't do twitter. What is the latest storm about?
As the U.K. and Baltic states announce that they will support Ukraine with anti-tank missiles and ground-to-air missiles, German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht says weapons are not the way to defuse the border crisis.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
Blazing Saddles anyone?
Watched it recently. Honestly, didn't hold up for me as much as I'd have thought.
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
The "letterboxes" and "bankrobbers" speech was not satire it was a carefully crafted dog whistle. Besides which it is humourless.
And picanninies and the offensive stereotypical observation? Who uses such old colonialist terms, other than an old colonialist?
The Sunday Times have reported that I have submitted a letter to the Chair of the 1922 Committee.
When I was asked about this by the Sunday Times, I gave them the same answer that I have given constituents who have written to me, namely that I do not intend to comment on what is an internal and confidential process within the Parliamentary party.
In the interests of being open with my constituents, it is no secret at Westminster that I have been unhappy about many aspects of the Number 10 operation. I have been quite open with the whips and earlier this week I spoke plainly to the Prime Minister about my concerns.
Like many colleagues, I am now awaiting the report being prepared by Sue Gray into "parties" at Downing Street, and the subsequent statement the Prime Minister has promised to make. I do not intend to comment further on this issue until after that report is published.
Is that a Non-denial denial, a Denial non-denial, a non-denial non-denial or a straight out denial?
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
The "letterboxes" and "bankrobbers" speech was not satire it was a carefully crafted dog whistle. Besides which it is humourless.
And picanninies and the offensive stereotypical observation? Who uses such old colonialist terms, other than an old colonialist?
The thing about his old comments is it is the same old ones each time, from an increasingly long time ago, so however wrong it might be if not backed up by more recent events and actions, it loses teeth as an effective attack, since it is not as though the Cabinet is undiverse. The Ghani allegation is doubly serious both for itself, and for making quite older stuff suddenly seem more part of a patten.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
The idea of the UK holding Russia to account would be a bit more convincing if our government had taken effective action to stop the vast amounts of dodgy money belonging to Russian kleptocrats and friends of Putin swilling around our economy, distorting the London property market, buying up bits of our media, and, dare I say, possibly adding to the funds of our ruling party. Not to mention Chelsea FC.....
Is there a lot they practically could do, or would a crackdown on Russian kleptocrats end up like all the other anti-money-laundering stuff which mostly seems to involve refusing to do banking stuff for anybody who might secretly be a Russian kleptocrat, ie anybody, until the bank has seen a recent British Gas quarterly statement?
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Starship Troopers the book lauds a society with two levels of citizenry where true citizenship only comes from the sacrifice of blood.
All justified with the "unarguable" moral calculus.
Nope it lauds a society with two levels of citizenry where true citizenship only comes from service. Indeed it doesn't even have to be military service as Heinlein himself made clear. It is like criticising France as being militaristic for having National Service when the vast majority of those who served did so in non military occupations.
The very left wing Science Fiction author Ken MacLeod has written a lot on this and thinks the claims of fascism are simply wrong.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Satire wasn’t it?
The film yes. The book, no.
Verhoevan didn't read the book - and so didn't realise the hero is actually a Filipino.
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
The Forever War is a far better book.
Tends to come in a collection with Forever Free and Forever Peace thesedays, which...are not good books however.
Speculated before on how the bit in Forever War where the protagonists finds society has developed into one which finds heterosexuality practically taboo is considered thesedays.
I wonder how long before someone gets thrown out of university for showing The Life of Brian at a film night.
A good bloke. A cut and a half above his sleazy colleagues
It should stand him in good stead, and if it doesn’t, he’s better off out of it.
He was one of the few who voted against the Paterson nonsense, but before that I hadn't noticed anything disloyal at all. That's something other MPs would respect I think. Shows a certain amount of judgement.
By the every brilliant Fintan O'Toole on what happens when you make a mess of an investigation.
Short version: you turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But do read the whole thing.
I listened to the R4 report on it that was broadcast earlier this evening. Having listened to the Colonel who was commanding the troops on the day I am not surprised that the whole thing turned out as it did. He struck me as being completely unsuited for the task he was required to do.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
I believe that au courant term ‘performative’ may apply again.
"'We'll work from home forever': Civil servants vow to fight returning to offices despite Boris Johnson declaring war on the 'Whitehall blob' – as some officials even relocate out to the Cotswolds and Cornwall to WFH
Boris Johnson is currently pushing for an end to working-from-home culture But some senior officials are planning to keep many staff remote permanently Government sources said the plan is for a 60:40 split between home and office"
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
He stood up about Paterson too.
A shame that you expect so little of MPs that you don’t recognise personal integrity
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
Blazing Saddles anyone?
Not seen the stories as I don't do twitter. What is the latest storm about?
BBC News is covering it too - the Conservative MP who claims she was demoted because she was muslim. The Chief Whip has allegedly been posting and then deleting tweets about it. It is almost like the blue touchpaper has been lit.
Edit: I cannot find it on the BBC website even though it was reported on the 9pm bulletin on R4. Sky have a story on it
Weird observation, but kind of nuts to see three Western European KINGDOMS (Britain, Spain & the Netherlands) standing up for Ukraine’s republic against an aggressive tyrant while the two most powerful REPUBLICS (France & Germany) sit it out or actively undermine NATO response
By the every brilliant Fintan O'Toole on what happens when you make a mess of an investigation.
Short version: you turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But do read the whole thing.
I listened to the R4 report on it that was broadcast earlier this evening. Having listened to the Colonel who was commanding the troops on the day I am not surprised that the whole thing turned out as it did. He struck me as being completely unsuited for the task he was required to do.
Yep, listened to a bit of it while making dinner. He was too stupid to realise that even if you are unrepentant about 'killing' 14 civilians you should at least try to conceal it as much as possible.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
I believe that au courant term ‘performative’ may apply again.
Periodically, "performative" is a performative "performative". A performative "performative" is when the poster's putative "performative" is not performative and instead they are performatively putting a possible process into the "performative" pigeonhole.
By the every brilliant Fintan O'Toole on what happens when you make a mess of an investigation.
Short version: you turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But do read the whole thing.
I listened to the R4 report on it that was broadcast earlier this evening. Having listened to the Colonel who was commanding the troops on the day I am not surprised that the whole thing turned out as it did. He struck me as being completely unsuited for the task he was required to do.
Yep, listened to a bit of it while making dinner. He was too stupid to realise that even if you are unrepentant about 'killing' 14 civilians you should at least try to conceal it as much as possible.
What set me off was the comment that (paraphrasing) going on a Demo was signing your own death warrant and you deserved to shot! I mean,.... WTAF!!!!!!
By the every brilliant Fintan O'Toole on what happens when you make a mess of an investigation.
Short version: you turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But do read the whole thing.
I listened to the R4 report on it that was broadcast earlier this evening. Having listened to the Colonel who was commanding the troops on the day I am not surprised that the whole thing turned out as it did. He struck me as being completely unsuited for the task he was required to do.
Yep, listened to a bit of it while making dinner. He was too stupid to realise that even if you are unrepentant about 'killing' 14 civilians you should at least try to conceal it as much as possible.
What set me off was the comment that (paraphrasing) going on a Demo was signing your own death warrant and you deserved to shot! I mean,.... WTAF!!!!!!
Similar comments on here about road-blocking protests.
"'We'll work from home forever': Civil servants vow to fight returning to offices despite Boris Johnson declaring war on the 'Whitehall blob' – as some officials even relocate out to the Cotswolds and Cornwall to WFH
Boris Johnson is currently pushing for an end to working-from-home culture But some senior officials are planning to keep many staff remote permanently Government sources said the plan is for a 60:40 split between home and office"
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
The "letterboxes" and "bankrobbers" speech was not satire it was a carefully crafted dog whistle. Besides which it is humourless.
And picanninies and the offensive stereotypical observation? Who uses such old colonialist terms, other than an old colonialist?
The thing about his old comments is it is the same old ones each time, from an increasingly long time ago, so however wrong it might be if not backed up by more recent events and actions, it loses teeth as an effective attack, since it is not as though the Cabinet is undiverse. The Ghani allegation is doubly serious both for itself, and for making quite older stuff suddenly seem more part of a patten.
The 'letterboxes and bankrobbers' article, taking the piss out of (some) Muslim women while ironically defending their right to wear what they like, was in August 2018. Not very long ago. Just after he'd resigned as Foreign Secretary, and just over a year before he became PM.
Starship Troopers is on Paramount Network (Freeview 32, Sky 150) at 10.50pm.
"MI do the dying, Fleet just do the flying"
Heinlein's writing seemed to have two modes: utter trash or inspired genuis.
The continual references to incest did nothing to enhance it
Yes, but Verhoevan didn't exactly stick to the book. Just made one of the most morally disturbing Sci Fi films. A real hymn to Facism and genocide.
Its not a hymn to facism and genocide. It is a balls to the wall satire of the same.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
If you think the book is a paean for fascism then you need to go back to school and try again.
Given the stories on Twitter tonight, perhaps we should be topical and move from fascism to racism.
Fair play to him for going public. I think it’s the decent thing to do.
However, I’m not convinced it’s a smart move. I think it’s more likely than not, Boris survives. And politically, even if he goes, I think his replacement is likely to be less favourable towards red wall seats when it comes to cutting the pie.
Sadly, I think Aaron will live to regret sending that letter.
He stood up about Paterson too.
A shame that you expect so little of MPs that you don’t recognise personal integrity
Voters want pork. An MP with personal integrity is a nice-to-have, but when it comes to elections, they vote for pork.
Nobody will be thinking of Paterson come the next election. Partygate will be a distant memory. I stand by my analysis - it’s fundamentally not in the interests of Tory red wall MP’s to oust Boris.
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
The "letterboxes" and "bankrobbers" speech was not satire it was a carefully crafted dog whistle. Besides which it is humourless.
And picanninies and the offensive stereotypical observation? Who uses such old colonialist terms, other than an old colonialist?
The thing about his old comments is it is the same old ones each time, from an increasingly long time ago, so however wrong it might be if not backed up by more recent events and actions, it loses teeth as an effective attack, since it is not as though the Cabinet is undiverse. The Ghani allegation is doubly serious both for itself, and for making quite older stuff suddenly seem more part of a patten.
The 'letterboxes and bankrobbers' article, taking the piss out of (some) Muslim women while ironically defending their right to wear what they like, was in August 2018. Not very long ago. Just after he'd resigned as Foreign Secretary, and just over a year before he became PM.
Ironically he plagiarised 'letterboxes and bankrobbers' from a Comment is Free article on the Guardian website.
Russia may be a bit dodgy in terms of it being run as a big men cartel but it is not unique in being a bit dodgy even amongst "western " countries and client states. I dont know much about ukraine politics but I doubt it is an angelic paradise. The UK should butt out and stop thinking we still police the world. It is nothing to do with us and despite what governments pump out , the world is not black and white in terms of goodies and baddies , it is a mere grey world .Wars dont free people they enslave them to governments
This is a case of vital nation interest. Our vital national interest.
The mistake I think you're making is in seeing strategy and legitimacy as separate. They aren't. Russia's strategic stance is to attack democracy as a concept, hence its attempts to interfere with elections in numerous countries, and its punishment of Ukraine for deciding to take a more Western path. The strategy is to show democracies as weak, divided internally and from one another, dissolute, and corrupt. This strategy must be resisted in all sphere. This means showing ourselves to be capable to politically serious, to have effective systems of government that nurture the economy and protect the life and liberty of our people, and to stand up to direct armed assaults on our territorial integrity. Western democracy is provably better than the nasty mafia-style kleptocracy Russia has, and our very existence delegitimises Putin's state-level theft. He will always be our enemy. It would be nice if he were gone, but at the bare minimum we should at least protect ourselves from him. And "us" means any Western-facing, democratically minded country.
Ukraine is in some ways a "new" country. It was freed from the oppressive shackles of Communism in (most of) our lifetimes. It's institutions are fragile and it needs space to grow. It's imperative that we help them because when people choose freedom and are crushed for it, it hurts freedom everywhere. If we cede freedom to oppression, oppression will come to us.
Respectfully I think that's mere fluff and nice virtuous sentences. I dont want to go to war with somebody who could destroy the world . I don't even want to risk it by posturing . I actually could not care less about who runs Ukraine (as do most people)
If Russia invades Ukraine you will soon care very much
How much did we care the last time they invaded, when they took Crimea, and the Donbas? Or when they took Abkazia, or Transnistra?
The millions of displaced Ukraine citizens flooding into Europe will make everyone in Europe care
So, are you really suggesting sending British fighting troops to fight Europe's most formidable military force? Not that we could deploy anything significant. Or perhaps bombs and cruise missiles onto Russian staging areas? Perhaps a little instant sunshine from Trident?
Or just sanctions and arms to Ukraine?
I believe that au courant term ‘performative’ may apply again.
Periodically, "performative" is a performative "performative". A performative "performative" is when the poster's putative "performative" is not performative and instead they are performatively putting a possible process into the "performative" pigeonhole.
And then we come to the unknowns of a possible process v. the very much known performative track record of those who may be constructing the possible process.
Is it shocking? We know about Boris Johnson's comments on Muslims, and he has Zac Goldsmith, who ran an Islamophobic mayoral campaign, in his cabinet. You knew this about Boris before the election. We all did.
Labour was led by Corbyn and the lib dems tried to subvert Brexit, so of course the conservatives won a near landslide
Maybe labour and the lib dems need to look at themselves over GE19
Yeah, I guess when it comes down to it I was more comfortable with being offered a second referendum on Brexit than I was with hating Jews and Muslims.
Fine if you want to make a moral equivalence between more democracy and more racism, but I don't. Not today and not ever.
There's a big ol' gulf between policies you don't like and racism. I hope you can quietly recognise that.
I absolutely hate racism
According to Boris Johnson, racism is fine if can be framed as satire.
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
The "letterboxes" and "bankrobbers" speech was not satire it was a carefully crafted dog whistle. Besides which it is humourless.
And picanninies and the offensive stereotypical observation? Who uses such old colonialist terms, other than an old colonialist?
The thing about his old comments is it is the same old ones each time, from an increasingly long time ago, so however wrong it might be if not backed up by more recent events and actions, it loses teeth as an effective attack, since it is not as though the Cabinet is undiverse. The Ghani allegation is doubly serious both for itself, and for making quite older stuff suddenly seem more part of a patten.
The 'letterboxes and bankrobbers' article, taking the piss out of (some) Muslim women while ironically defending their right to wear what they like, was in August 2018. Not very long ago. Just after he'd resigned as Foreign Secretary, and just over a year before he became PM.
Ironically he plagiarised 'letterboxes and bankrobbers' from a Comment is Free article on the Guardian website.
"'We'll work from home forever': Civil servants vow to fight returning to offices despite Boris Johnson declaring war on the 'Whitehall blob' – as some officials even relocate out to the Cotswolds and Cornwall to WFH
Boris Johnson is currently pushing for an end to working-from-home culture But some senior officials are planning to keep many staff remote permanently Government sources said the plan is for a 60:40 split between home and office"
By the every brilliant Fintan O'Toole on what happens when you make a mess of an investigation.
Short version: you turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But do read the whole thing.
I listened to the R4 report on it that was broadcast earlier this evening. Having listened to the Colonel who was commanding the troops on the day I am not surprised that the whole thing turned out as it did. He struck me as being completely unsuited for the task he was required to do.
Yep, listened to a bit of it while making dinner. He was too stupid to realise that even if you are unrepentant about 'killing' 14 civilians you should at least try to conceal it as much as possible.
What set me off was the comment that (paraphrasing) going on a Demo was signing your own death warrant and you deserved to shot! I mean,.... WTAF!!!!!!
There was a real sense that those scruffy louts that had been throwing stones and hurling abuse at ar lads were going to get a damn good seeing to and they would bloody deserve it.
Comments
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1485017391058894853
See @robpowellnews feed for all the minutiae and analysis tonight
- and clearly a big day on @skynews tomorrow morn unpicking what went on. Live from 0930
- https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1485017565051207685
If he wanted to make an anti-war film, why not buy the rights to The Forever War?
Rather than the mess he created, which stole about half the action and plot from "Armor" by John Starkey. And then screwed it up.
If you think the film is glorifying anything you are watching it wrong.
Now the book, the book is both dull as dishwater and an absolute paen for fascism from first to last. Completely lauding the idea of "worthy" and "unworthy" citizens.
Thr film however is taking the god damn piss.
It’s a satire of war propaganda & the militaristic fascism that the book (sort of) celebrates. A commentary in part on contemporary Hollywood’s hand in glove cosying up to the CIA & the US military. If you can’t see that the film is satirising fascist propaganda then I suggest that your media literaracy really needs some polishing up, because Verhoevan really wasn’t subtle about it.
Johnsons own history with Russia is quite an interesting read.
Because Space Fascism that simply consisted of smashing planets would be really anodyne looking..... What was the line, in another film- "Candy Coated Armageddon"?
Mind you, Enders Game went there. And how.
Boris has very noticeably failed to deliver.
But I could be wrong, as I often am.
The main protagonists in the film come from Argentina. I am a fan of the film, but Verhoevans films are always interesting. Even Showgirls, which has developed into Cult status.
A few years ago there was a lot of tracing of assets he was thought to own via the Paradise Papers and so on.
In an unusual move based on declassified intelligence, the foreign office alleged an ex Ukrainian MP was “being considered as a potential candidate”
https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1485020617539735561
I say: in matters of geo-politics, 'recent weeks' count for little, because it's often too late. We used to call it foreign policy - having a consistent line on our friends and foes for years on end, not just recent weeks.
I read the whole thing and really wished i hadn't.
The Foreign Office took the unusual step of naming former Ukrainian MP Yevhen Murayev as a potential Kremlin candidate.
...
Mr Murayev, a media owner, lost his seat in the Ukrainian parliament when his party failed to secure 5% of the vote in the 2019 elections.
The Foreign Office also named four other Ukrainian politicians who it said maintained links with the Russian intelligence services.
It said some of the individuals had been in contact with Russian intelligence officers working on an invasion plan.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60095459
But I'm more of a Total Recall man, personally.
Zwartboek was intriguing as well.
Steve Baker MP FRSA
@SteveBakerHW
·
3h
That Nus could be treated like this is completely intolerable.
I value
@Nus_Ghani
as a great colleague and I'm appalled. We must get to the bottom of it.
Quote Tweet
https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1484967648513650688
The hero of the film seemed awfully... er... Aryan for Argentina. Perhaps he was an orphan brought up by foster parents, and visited by Sir Laurence Olivier?
Michael Fabricant
@Mike_Fabricant
A former minister who had been plotting against #Boris for some time now suddenly blames her sacking on #Islamophobia when (a) there are many excellent Muslim ministers in the Government and (b) she was nice but unimaginative and mediocre.
Keir Starmer
@Keir_Starmer
·
54m
This is shocking to read, the Conservatives must investigate immediately. Solidarity with
@Nus_Ghani
for your bravery in speaking out.
There’s report after report of appalling behaviour and lack of respect at the centre of this government.
Culture is set at the top.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1485009933238157317
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/22/confusion-over-uk-claim-that-putin-plans-coup-in-ukraine
Junked of course, like every promise he’s ever made.
https://twitter.com/apmassaro3/status/1484924939098640385?s=21
As subsequent tweets point out, other Western European Kingdoms like Denmark & Sweden are also lending a hand….
The Tory Party has more looney tune arseholes than the men’s loos at Warner Brothers studios.
Splendid!
SPECULATION IN SUNDAY TIMES.
The Sunday Times have reported that I have submitted a letter to the Chair of the 1922 Committee.
When I was asked about this by the Sunday Times, I gave them the same answer that I have given constituents who have written to me, namely that I do not intend to comment on what is an internal and confidential process within the Parliamentary party.
In the interests of being open with my constituents, it is no secret at Westminster that I have been unhappy about many aspects of the Number 10 operation. I have been quite open with the whips and earlier this week I spoke plainly to the Prime Minister about my concerns.
Like many colleagues, I am now awaiting the report being prepared by Sue Gray into "parties" at Downing Street, and the subsequent statement the Prime Minister has promised to make. I do not intend to comment further on this issue until after that report is published.
https://twitter.com/drjennings/status/1485015344234258435?s=21
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1485026898472230915?s=20
Speculated before on how the bit in Forever War where the protagonists finds society has developed into one which finds heterosexuality practically taboo is considered thesedays.
Blazing Saddles anyone?
There's no way it was serious, and that's part of its appeal.
All justified with the "unarguable" moral calculus.
I’ll hear the champagne corks popping all the way here in Manhattan when the crooked sea-lion finally barks his last.
https://twitter.com/POLITICOEurope/status/1484859289504260103?s=20
Anyway, on a completely unrelated topic, the following article is very well worth reading - https://twitter.com/fotoole/status/1484875659222659075?s=21.
By the every brilliant Fintan O'Toole on what happens when you make a mess of an investigation.
Short version: you turn a disaster into a catastrophe. But do read the whole thing.
And picanninies and the offensive stereotypical observation? Who uses such old colonialist terms, other than an old colonialist?
It all seems to be getting a bit mixed
The very left wing Science Fiction author Ken MacLeod has written a lot on this and thinks the claims of fascism are simply wrong.
For *that* scene.
Boris Johnson is currently pushing for an end to working-from-home culture
But some senior officials are planning to keep many staff remote permanently
Government sources said the plan is for a 60:40 split between home and office"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10431021/Well-work-home-forever-Civil-servants-vow-fight-returning-offices.html
A shame that you expect so little of MPs that you don’t recognise personal integrity
Edit: I cannot find it on the BBC website even though it was reported on the 9pm bulletin on R4. Sky have a story on it
https://news.sky.com/story/chief-whip-denies-claims-he-told-mp-she-was-sacked-as-a-minister-because-of-her-muslim-faith-12523176
Nobody will be thinking of Paterson come the next election. Partygate will be a distant memory. I stand by my analysis - it’s fundamentally not in the interests of Tory red wall MP’s to oust Boris.
I think Aaron has got this wrong.
We’re all fodder for his joking larceny, whatever colour we are.
As for Mark Spencer, he’s another who won’t be asked to stick around come the BoJo ouster. He couldn’t whip a walnut.