The markets edge back to Johnson but 2022 exit still odds on – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Over the Brenner from Munich to BolzanoLeon said:
Favourite train journey?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is to meRochdalePioneers said:
It's not as exciting as your officeLeon said:
Photos. We need photos!RochdalePioneers said:
My office today is the 10am London to Aberdeen train, where two sets of train crew are keeping me plied with drinks and food. Have read loads of negatives about these new trains but they're a very comfy place to while away the hours in first class.Leon said:Look, there’s my weird bar snack on the left. Cheers
Stuff like this makes me appreciate the miracle of the internet. 200 years ago if I wanted to tell you all about the snack I was having I would have had to write you all individual letters with a goose quill, describing my snack with words, then put the sealed letters on a tea clipper bound for England and you’d only have learned about my snack maybe a year later as the letters slowly made their way across the island of Britain in carriages to your various hovels and mansions. Now I can just do this:
This is what the internet was FOR, all along
Lots of memories of first class trips to London and of course a lifetime love of all things trains
In the UK?
Then abroad?0 -
Durham - Edinburgh I thoroughly recommend.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.3 -
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1488885734375403527
A bit thick isn't he? "those in "charge of organisations should be held to account for their wider achievements and wider failings." says Simon Clarke...0 -
Hence Rochdale and Rotherham. In part, anyway.Malmesbury said:
The Winston Smith blog http://winstonsmith33.blogspot.com/ is interesting reading in light of all this.OldKingCole said:
I seem to recall a TV programme about that. I don't think all the girls had disabilities; I think some were in 'care' partly at least for misbehaviour, and there wasn't any 'outside' corroboration of their story.Saville, again IIRC, made it clear that he'd fight the case as hard as he could, so the chance of a successful prosecution was held to be low.rcs1000 said:
The problem we have is that we don't know how much evidence there was, whether the girls themselves (or their parents) wanted to testify, etc. The CPS has a limited budget, and their goal - always - is going to be to maximise the number of successful prosecutions. If something is seen as difficult - perhaps because the primary witnesses would struggle on the stand - then one can see why it might get dropped.NerysHughes said:
You are correct , it was when SKS was DPP that 4 cases from Surrey and Sussex police against Jimmy Saville for the rape of learning disabled girls under the age of 16 were dropped by the CPS.tlg86 said:
The Guardian:kjh said:
Same here. As I said Nazir, I think, was clear on the matter, yet dates seem to contradict that and I trust Nazir so I suspect that there is more to this that we don't know in terms of events and dates.tlg86 said:
This is the reference:kjh said:
We do have a bit of a conflict there don't we? I don't want to slag off Wikipedia as, as far as I am concerned, it is God. I can only assume there is some other explanation relating to an earlier date.tlg86 said:
Wikipedia says:TheScreamingEagles said:
AIUI it was analogous to David Cameron apologising for Bloody Sunday.tlg86 said:
So Starmer's apology was for stuff that happened before he was DPP? I didn't realise that.kjh said:
This was covered by Nazir Afzal this morning. Let's hope I get this right, probably not fully, so please correct where I have it wrong.tlg86 said:
Not sure that's quite the same. Ministers make decisions and I doubt that got to the top of the department (terrible as it was).Carnyx said:
He was given a pass to a sensitive NHS site with the decision made at a very high level of the Dept of Health. The Tories were running the country at the time. What I am not sure is whether the relevant Minister knew, but there is such a thing as responsibility fo r one'sa department (though that is conspicously lacking in Mr Johnson). And if the Tories are complaining about SKS and his running of the DPP, they might like to consider how compliciot they were in actually facilitating the crimes.HYUFD said:
Savile also was invited to Chequers by BlairTheScreamingEagles said:
Actually I believe it.kle4 said:
Both of them. Obviously he wont retract as he's already double downed, and those who've not already put in a letter would be pushed over the edge in defence of Keir? Give me a break.eek said:Filing under things that ain't ever going to happen
The Times
@thetimes
Up-pointing red triangle JUST IN: Boris Johnson has been warned that more Tory MPs will put in letters of no confidence unless he retracts his claim that Sir Keir Starmer failed to prosecute Jimmy Savile when he was director of public prosecutions
In my call earlier, it'll be a race to the bottom, as it legitimises this.
I don't expect Starmer to rise to it, but some leftie outrider will.
Thatcher "responded by inviting the now-disgraced DJ to lunch at Chequers, spending 11 consecutive New Year’s Eves with him and overseeing his knighthood"
https://twitter.com/andrewspoooner/status/1488823436113854465
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/scots-pop-guru-alan-mcgee-23546990
I'd be curious to know what sort of cases get reviewed by the DPP. Savile was quite high profile, so I'm slightly surprised that it didn't make its way to the top of the CPS.
The police incorrectly told victims and the CPS that there were no other incidents other than theirs and each case was not put together with the others. So on the basis of 1 complaint in each case the CPS decided there wasn't the evidence to prosecute that case. Nasir also covered something regarding the independence of the prosecution, which I didn't really follow, but meant that the Director of the CPS would not be aware of this. He also pointed out that Starmer wasn't at the CPS at this time (rather important) After Starmer was appointed he appointed Nasir to review the problem of child abuse cases not being prosecuted and the prosecution rate significantly improved. So in fact Starmer was not only not responsible for the Saville failures but actually was instrumental in resolving the issues. In addition Nasir made an astounding claim (bearing in mind liable) re Johnson making a previous statement (I assume an article) about child abuse cases and spaffing money up the wall.
Sadly my recollection is not as good as hearing it first hand but it was rather damning.
I don't know if records are kept regarding complaints. It's a shame that when others came forward, no one knew that it wasn't the first time an allegation had been made.
Didn't happen on his watch but as the incumbent it fell to him to apologise.
On 24 October 2012 the Crown Prosecution Service said the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, would review the service's decisions not to prosecute Savile in 2009 in relation to four claims against him for sexual abuse dating back to the 1970s.
SKS was DPP in 2009.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9630550/Jimmy-Savile-What-George-Entwistle-told-MPs-about-Panorama-justthewomen-Newsnight-and-the-conversation-at-the-Hilton-Hotel.html
I don't have a Telegraph account, so can't read it.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/24/jimmy-savile-dpp-2009-evidence
Cameron told the house that the DPP had ordered a review of the evidence considered by the CPS in 2009 relating to indecent assault allegations against Savile from the 1970s. The evidence was submitted by Surrey police, which began an investigation in 2007.
Fairly conclusive that this was on SKS's watch, not that I hold it against him. Whether or not it should have been escalated to the DPP in the first place, I don't know.
I have absolutely no idea how the CPS works but I would imagine that for such a high profile case someone senior took the decision.
It's easy with the benefit of hindsight to say 'Savile was a wrong-un'. But did the CPS/DPP know that? Or did they just think that the chances of a conviction were not great, that the witnesses parents did not want them grilled on the stand, and see a better use of scarce resources elsewhere?
At the time, of course, he had powerful, and wealthy, friends.
What he makes clear is that the old, abusive, system of prison like control of children in care has been replaced with complete lack of control. One they are early teenagers, they use the care system as a dormitory.0 -
Lol. Either that or he is trolling Big ClownRochdalePioneers said:https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1488885734375403527
A bit thick isn't he? "those in "charge of organisations should be held to account for their wider achievements and wider failings." says Simon Clarke...0 -
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.2 -
Freight only? Ah, that is sad. So sad. It is an amazing train journey, and the canyon is phenomenal. We flew outFoxy said:
I was told that the line is freight only now, apart from occasional tourist specials. Part of the enjoyment of such public transport is the people watching.Leon said:
Believe it or not I’ve done the very same train journey. Fantastic indeed. The tribal people in loin cloths with the Beatles haircuts. The way the railroad spirals in on itself. The mad village at the bottom. The Lost Cathedral of Satevo!Foxy said:
I took the train to the Copper Canyon some 30 years ago. Its as big as the grand canyon, but with a train too!.Leon said:
Favourite train journey?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is to meRochdalePioneers said:
It's not as exciting as your officeLeon said:
Photos. We need photos!RochdalePioneers said:
My office today is the 10am London to Aberdeen train, where two sets of train crew are keeping me plied with drinks and food. Have read loads of negatives about these new trains but they're a very comfy place to while away the hours in first class.Leon said:Look, there’s my weird bar snack on the left. Cheers
Stuff like this makes me appreciate the miracle of the internet. 200 years ago if I wanted to tell you all about the snack I was having I would have had to write you all individual letters with a goose quill, describing my snack with words, then put the sealed letters on a tea clipper bound for England and you’d only have learned about my snack maybe a year later as the letters slowly made their way across the island of Britain in carriages to your various hovels and mansions. Now I can just do this:
This is what the internet was FOR, all along
Lots of memories of first class trips to London and of course a lifetime love of all things trains
In the UK?
Then abroad?
A great trip for scenery, and fascinating local colour on the train. We got off in Divisidaro, to tour the canyon by horseback with a Mexican cowboy. The canyon only had 2 hotels at the time and a couple of dozen tourists. Perhaps it still does.
https://coppercanyon.com/index.php/train
https://www.alamy.com/the-lost-cathedral-at-satevo-in-batopilas-canyon-in-the-copper-canyon-region-of-chihuahua-mexico-along-the-batopilas-river-image331596102.html
Not sure how safe the trip Mrs Foxy and I did would be now. We drove from Phoenix AZ to Puerto Vallata in an old pick up truck, with the canyon as a side trip. That West Coast of Mexico is a long way, and we have many great memories, as well as some of the worst food poisoning of my life!.
Looking back I now realize it was an epicenter of the drug trade, hence the armed guards on the train, which at the time we thought were there for “colour”
It was on that same journey that I got a BUS from the Canyon to Ciudad Juarez, then crossed into El Paso (where I had the worst Chinese meal of my life). Then I hired a car and drove around the wilder parts of Texas. Marfa! Brilliant place
I remember thinking on my bus journey “Ooh Ciudad Juarez seems a bit depressing” - again this was early in the narcowars, but they were already happening, I took silly risks without realizing
Mexico used to be one of my very favorite countries to visit. So much variety. And good food (unlike most of Latin America). Such a loss0 -
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.0 -
Your name gives away a certain bias, but it is a bias that has much merit.Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.1 -
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.0 -
Well he's a Smoggie isn't he? Those lot are thick as mince even before the smog addles their brains.RochdalePioneers said:https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1488885734375403527
A bit thick isn't he? "those in "charge of organisations should be held to account for their wider achievements and wider failings." says Simon Clarke...
Edit - Further proof he's thick as mince, he read history at University College, Oxford.0 -
Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html1 -
Speaking of TVs, I'm pretty sure BBC3 isn't really aim't at the PB style audience - but it should be up and running again and they're showing a Africa Cup of Nations Semi-final tonight-
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/football/africa-cup-of-nations/burkina-faso-v-senegal-betting-312079910 -
What was international practice?Foxy said:
Err, accuracy?Anabobazina said:
An absolutely moronic decision to change the methodology and expect the innumerate media (and iSage) to explain it away. Especially as they are binning the whole shebang in circa 60 days anyway.AlistairM said:This is going to cause some panic:
Lots of backdating though due to this:
No change to the current trends.
What was the point of it?
Anyone?
It was plainly absurd to ignore 28 day deaths from reinfection, by counting 28 days from the original infection.
I have no problem about people arguing against control measures for social, economic or ideological reasons, but denials that it is a serious health issue really gets my goat.
And what was recommended by the WHO?0 -
So, not Radiohead then...Leon said:
I heard some truly disturbing gossip about “a very very well known 20th century rock star” which claimed that when his band entered town X, he and his one like-minded roadie would head for the nearest children’s home/orphanage, and select which pretty girl or boy they wanted, and pay handsomely for the privilege. They weren’t averse to retarded children, as they were even more malleableOldKingCole said:
I seem to recall a TV programme about that. I don't think all the girls had disabilities; I think some were in 'care' partly at least for misbehaviour, and there wasn't any 'outside' corroboration of their story.Saville, again IIRC, made it clear that he'd fight the case as hard as he could, so the chance of a successful prosecution was held to be low.rcs1000 said:
The problem we have is that we don't know how much evidence there was, whether the girls themselves (or their parents) wanted to testify, etc. The CPS has a limited budget, and their goal - always - is going to be to maximise the number of successful prosecutions. If something is seen as difficult - perhaps because the primary witnesses would struggle on the stand - then one can see why it might get dropped.NerysHughes said:
You are correct , it was when SKS was DPP that 4 cases from Surrey and Sussex police against Jimmy Saville for the rape of learning disabled girls under the age of 16 were dropped by the CPS.tlg86 said:
The Guardian:kjh said:
Same here. As I said Nazir, I think, was clear on the matter, yet dates seem to contradict that and I trust Nazir so I suspect that there is more to this that we don't know in terms of events and dates.tlg86 said:
This is the reference:kjh said:
We do have a bit of a conflict there don't we? I don't want to slag off Wikipedia as, as far as I am concerned, it is God. I can only assume there is some other explanation relating to an earlier date.tlg86 said:
Wikipedia says:TheScreamingEagles said:
AIUI it was analogous to David Cameron apologising for Bloody Sunday.tlg86 said:
So Starmer's apology was for stuff that happened before he was DPP? I didn't realise that.kjh said:
This was covered by Nazir Afzal this morning. Let's hope I get this right, probably not fully, so please correct where I have it wrong.tlg86 said:
Not sure that's quite the same. Ministers make decisions and I doubt that got to the top of the department (terrible as it was).Carnyx said:
He was given a pass to a sensitive NHS site with the decision made at a very high level of the Dept of Health. The Tories were running the country at the time. What I am not sure is whether the relevant Minister knew, but there is such a thing as responsibility fo r one'sa department (though that is conspicously lacking in Mr Johnson). And if the Tories are complaining about SKS and his running of the DPP, they might like to consider how compliciot they were in actually facilitating the crimes.HYUFD said:
Savile also was invited to Chequers by BlairTheScreamingEagles said:
Actually I believe it.kle4 said:
Both of them. Obviously he wont retract as he's already double downed, and those who've not already put in a letter would be pushed over the edge in defence of Keir? Give me a break.eek said:Filing under things that ain't ever going to happen
The Times
@thetimes
Up-pointing red triangle JUST IN: Boris Johnson has been warned that more Tory MPs will put in letters of no confidence unless he retracts his claim that Sir Keir Starmer failed to prosecute Jimmy Savile when he was director of public prosecutions
In my call earlier, it'll be a race to the bottom, as it legitimises this.
I don't expect Starmer to rise to it, but some leftie outrider will.
Thatcher "responded by inviting the now-disgraced DJ to lunch at Chequers, spending 11 consecutive New Year’s Eves with him and overseeing his knighthood"
https://twitter.com/andrewspoooner/status/1488823436113854465
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/scots-pop-guru-alan-mcgee-23546990
I'd be curious to know what sort of cases get reviewed by the DPP. Savile was quite high profile, so I'm slightly surprised that it didn't make its way to the top of the CPS.
The police incorrectly told victims and the CPS that there were no other incidents other than theirs and each case was not put together with the others. So on the basis of 1 complaint in each case the CPS decided there wasn't the evidence to prosecute that case. Nasir also covered something regarding the independence of the prosecution, which I didn't really follow, but meant that the Director of the CPS would not be aware of this. He also pointed out that Starmer wasn't at the CPS at this time (rather important) After Starmer was appointed he appointed Nasir to review the problem of child abuse cases not being prosecuted and the prosecution rate significantly improved. So in fact Starmer was not only not responsible for the Saville failures but actually was instrumental in resolving the issues. In addition Nasir made an astounding claim (bearing in mind liable) re Johnson making a previous statement (I assume an article) about child abuse cases and spaffing money up the wall.
Sadly my recollection is not as good as hearing it first hand but it was rather damning.
I don't know if records are kept regarding complaints. It's a shame that when others came forward, no one knew that it wasn't the first time an allegation had been made.
Didn't happen on his watch but as the incumbent it fell to him to apologise.
On 24 October 2012 the Crown Prosecution Service said the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, would review the service's decisions not to prosecute Savile in 2009 in relation to four claims against him for sexual abuse dating back to the 1970s.
SKS was DPP in 2009.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9630550/Jimmy-Savile-What-George-Entwistle-told-MPs-about-Panorama-justthewomen-Newsnight-and-the-conversation-at-the-Hilton-Hotel.html
I don't have a Telegraph account, so can't read it.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/24/jimmy-savile-dpp-2009-evidence
Cameron told the house that the DPP had ordered a review of the evidence considered by the CPS in 2009 relating to indecent assault allegations against Savile from the 1970s. The evidence was submitted by Surrey police, which began an investigation in 2007.
Fairly conclusive that this was on SKS's watch, not that I hold it against him. Whether or not it should have been escalated to the DPP in the first place, I don't know.
I have absolutely no idea how the CPS works but I would imagine that for such a high profile case someone senior took the decision.
It's easy with the benefit of hindsight to say 'Savile was a wrong-un'. But did the CPS/DPP know that? Or did they just think that the chances of a conviction were not great, that the witnesses parents did not want them grilled on the stand, and see a better use of scarce resources elsewhere?
At the time, of course, he had powerful, and wealthy, friends.
It came from a hugely well-informed music journalist, and I believe it to be probably true (but cannot know for sure, of course). It has made me quite conflicted, as I love the music of the band in question1 -
Just noticed this thread seems to have turned into train spotters anonymous. Either that or Leon is not SeanT as we all thought, but is actually Michael Portillo. Might explain a few things.1
-
I use the Remarkable tablet. It is genuinely just like taking notes on paper. But it all ends up in the cloud.Leon said:
I know plenty of people that use old fash notepads. But what if you lose it?RochdalePioneers said:
Am I odd for using a "proper notepad"? If it isn't written it didn't happen... I use notepads both for to do lists and longhand notes. Which then get filed as they get filled up. Being able to refer back to contemporaneous notes at the time they were made is the only real thing that stuck with my journalism degree.Leon said:
Is the light too dim in your mum’s basement?kjh said:
Ewww no, absolutely not.Leon said:I think every PB-er should post a photo of exactly where they are now, and what is happening in front of them
Any identifying evidence can and should be removed, of course, but all else must stay
Larks!
Only joking.
However it is quite an interesting exercise. It humanises people. I already feel a bit kinder towards Rochdale. Suddenly he is a real person who uses an old fashioned note pad, likes Zero coke AND tea. And so forth
Of course it is not for everyone, many will want to remain entirely anon, and fair enough
I use Evernote. It is all stored in the ethersphere so you can’t lose anything, It syncs across all devices. I can search all my notes from when I began using it (in about 2012). It’s brilliant
I recently looked at my notes - more like diary entries - from Jan/Feb 2021. My God I was in the Pit of Winter Lockdown Despair. All I could see ahead of me was more darkness and cold. Awful
It makes this sojourn in Sri Lanka even more delightful, and it is already quite high on the delightfulness scale0 -
Didn't she go to Cambridge?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.0 -
Way Off Topic - Portland Oregonian: Bud Clark, Portland’s former ‘citizen mayor,’ dies at 90
https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/02/portlands-former-citizen-mayor-bud-clark-dead-at-90.html
I post this, in memory of a famous poster (the old-fashioned kind) that featured His Honor showing his personal appreciation for the arts in the Rose City:
Bud Clark - "expose yourself to art"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWxG0XRU_Io0 -
Surely not as bad as reading Classics?TheScreamingEagles said:
Well he's a Smoggie isn't he? Those lot are thick as mince even before the smog addles their brains.RochdalePioneers said:https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1488885734375403527
A bit thick isn't he? "those in "charge of organisations should be held to account for their wider achievements and wider failings." says Simon Clarke...
Edit - Further proof he's thick as mince, he read history at University College, Oxford.0 -
Two more Tory MPs are submitting letters of no confidence in the prime minister over his handling of partygate allegations https://trib.al/xvi6Koy0
-
Has it solved the long problem of these kind of pads never feeling "natural" to use? I have a wacom drawing tablet and its a skill in itself to actually draw on it, you have to practice to get good, it really isn't like drawing on a piece of paper at all.rcs1000 said:
I use the Remarkable tablet. It is genuinely just like taking notes on paper. But it all ends up in the cloud.Leon said:
I know plenty of people that use old fash notepads. But what if you lose it?RochdalePioneers said:
Am I odd for using a "proper notepad"? If it isn't written it didn't happen... I use notepads both for to do lists and longhand notes. Which then get filed as they get filled up. Being able to refer back to contemporaneous notes at the time they were made is the only real thing that stuck with my journalism degree.Leon said:
Is the light too dim in your mum’s basement?kjh said:
Ewww no, absolutely not.Leon said:I think every PB-er should post a photo of exactly where they are now, and what is happening in front of them
Any identifying evidence can and should be removed, of course, but all else must stay
Larks!
Only joking.
However it is quite an interesting exercise. It humanises people. I already feel a bit kinder towards Rochdale. Suddenly he is a real person who uses an old fashioned note pad, likes Zero coke AND tea. And so forth
Of course it is not for everyone, many will want to remain entirely anon, and fair enough
I use Evernote. It is all stored in the ethersphere so you can’t lose anything, It syncs across all devices. I can search all my notes from when I began using it (in about 2012). It’s brilliant
I recently looked at my notes - more like diary entries - from Jan/Feb 2021. My God I was in the Pit of Winter Lockdown Despair. All I could see ahead of me was more darkness and cold. Awful
It makes this sojourn in Sri Lanka even more delightful, and it is already quite high on the delightfulness scale0 -
Same MPs as before, no?Scott_xP said:Two more Tory MPs are submitting letters of no confidence in the prime minister over his handling of partygate allegations https://trib.al/xvi6Koy
0 -
Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”2 -
When looking at a reform it's relevant where else it has been done and with what impact. People are saying self-Id is a perverts charter and an attack on women's rights, yet several countries have adopted self-Id and it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights. Germany is about to join these countries. When the UK government looked at this in 2018 they concluded that self-Id was a positive reform - because it would help this minority and harm nobody else. The Women & Equalities Committee of the HoC has recently re-endorsed this in their report of Dec 21. There are some solid arguments for this reform. People who are interested should take a look at them.Luckyguy1983 said:
'Those other people are doing it and recommending it' isn't actually an argument in its favour is it? It's the same argument lemmings use when charging over a cliff. If you agree with it, you can surely find a single convincing argument for it other than pointing at the German Government.kinabalu said:
I've posted the report from the relevant House of Commons Committee which after taking evidence from all sides recommends self-Id as the way forward. I've also pointed out that this confirms the conclusions of the UK government when it looked into this previously in 2018. I've further pointed out that several countries have adopted this approach (and have no plans to reverse it) and that Germany is about to. Like it or not these are solid points. I've also sought to explain at length why imo it is illogical (and tbh rather noxious) to present self-Id as being a 'perverts charter'.Cyclefree said:
The one thing you haven't done is posted the rational evidence-led argument in favour. And when I have challenged you on certain consequences of your preference, you have agreed with me eg in relation to being against women being forced to name rapists as women even in a trial, even though this would be the inevitable consequence of self-ID.kinabalu said:
Unfair and a bit of a misrepresentation. On here we tend to get this debate presented as if all the rational, evidence-led argument is on the side of those opposed to trans self-Id and inclusion. I try to correct that by posting the rational, evidence-led argument in favour. Which is considerable.Cyclefree said:Anyway, I
The answer to that, surely, is for Labour to have sensible policies on such issues which don't enrage people so that the Tory party's attempt at culture wars don't work.rkrkrk said:Don't disagree with Cyclefree's header, it's a good catalogue of government failings.
But unless people are prepared to vote this government out, it won't change.
And I worry that the Conservatives are very good at finding issues which enrage otherwise hostile voters and stop them from voting Labour... like trans rights or border crossings or human rights or woke or free speech etc.
It is possible to have such policies. I have suggested some. I dare say I could suggest more. But if you do Labour accuse you of some terrible thought crime or ostracise you or refuse to listen.
Take one example today - it is a year to the day since the death of Maureen Colquhoun, the first openly lesbian Labour MP. She was not treated well by Labour. A Labour group wanted to have some gathering in her memory and invited as a speaker her biographer and personal friend. Then disinvited her because this person thinks the GRA is just fine as it is. So the event is not now going ahead. When Labour behaves in this way to women - when it refuses to debate or listen, when it takes the view that there can only be one view on a topic which is of interest to lots of women for perfectly rational, evidence-based reasons (yes @kinabalu there are plenty even though you choose to ignore them) then it is not the Tories who are doing the enraging but Labour.
Womens' rights matter to me / the rights of children not to be abused / safeguarding and a decent police force one can trust matter to me - as my header today (and plenty more on these topics) would show. But I do not trust Labour on them. So .... they know what they have to do if they want my vote.
Where are Labour's views on police reforms, for instance? Why have the Mayor of London and the Opposition Leader supported the Met Commissioner despite all the evidence against her? Why should I believe that Labour will be any better on this or on child sex abuse etc?
And you stated yesterday something that is patently untrue - namely that trans activists do not want to erase womens' rights. I pointed out that it was the publicly stated position of trans lobby groups to remove all reference to sex in equalities legislation and to all sex-based exemptions in the Equality Act. This would remove womens' current rights. I also asked you how women would be able to take action against discrimination on the grounds of sex under the Equal Pay Act if sex was no longer a relevant category. What sort of comparator would be used and how?
So it seems to me that you do not fully understand the consequences of what you propose.
For the record, I am not opposed in the slightest to the existing rights trans people (ie those with gender dysphoria have) - those legal rights are exactly the same as everyone else has - nor do I wish to take any away. What I do oppose is the campaigns to remove womens' rights both in law and in practice. You would do well to understand how self-ID does impact on those rights and why women are concerned.
I did *not* in my post yesterday opine on what 'trans activists' do or don't want to do. What I said was that the pro trans argument isn't 100% owned by a collection of foaming twitter activists hellbent on trampling all over women's rights. Eg I'm not a trans activist (as if!) but I recognize the strength of the case for self-Id. This doesn't mean I wish to obliterate all reference to sex in the laws of the country or to abolish the whole concept of birth sex in favour of gender. Others may argue for this but that's a matter for them. It certainly doesn't follow automatically from having a less burdensome, de-medicalized gender transition process based predominantly on self-Id.1 -
I love the Remarkable target, a great devicercs1000 said:
I use the Remarkable tablet. It is genuinely just like taking notes on paper. But it all ends up in the cloud.Leon said:
I know plenty of people that use old fash notepads. But what if you lose it?RochdalePioneers said:
Am I odd for using a "proper notepad"? If it isn't written it didn't happen... I use notepads both for to do lists and longhand notes. Which then get filed as they get filled up. Being able to refer back to contemporaneous notes at the time they were made is the only real thing that stuck with my journalism degree.Leon said:
Is the light too dim in your mum’s basement?kjh said:
Ewww no, absolutely not.Leon said:I think every PB-er should post a photo of exactly where they are now, and what is happening in front of them
Any identifying evidence can and should be removed, of course, but all else must stay
Larks!
Only joking.
However it is quite an interesting exercise. It humanises people. I already feel a bit kinder towards Rochdale. Suddenly he is a real person who uses an old fashioned note pad, likes Zero coke AND tea. And so forth
Of course it is not for everyone, many will want to remain entirely anon, and fair enough
I use Evernote. It is all stored in the ethersphere so you can’t lose anything, It syncs across all devices. I can search all my notes from when I began using it (in about 2012). It’s brilliant
I recently looked at my notes - more like diary entries - from Jan/Feb 2021. My God I was in the Pit of Winter Lockdown Despair. All I could see ahead of me was more darkness and cold. Awful
It makes this sojourn in Sri Lanka even more delightful, and it is already quite high on the delightfulness scale0 -
Oh, you had me excited there. We've already counted them!Scott_xP said:Two more Tory MPs are submitting letters of no confidence in the prime minister over his handling of partygate allegations https://trib.al/xvi6Koy
0 -
There goes the 250-1 bet…Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html0 -
Ellwood and Mangnall so not newScott_xP said:Two more Tory MPs are submitting letters of no confidence in the prime minister over his handling of partygate allegations https://trib.al/xvi6Koy
0 -
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.0 -
Well, on the "what are you doing", I'm in the background making Pizza dough to partly use and partly freeze.
I went out the other day and came back with the correct flour.
And I ordered *my* pizza oven at slightly less expense than Max. This one, which is £169 but still reviews well and claims to make a pizza in 3 minutes at 450C.
https://pizzaunited.co.uk/collections/frontpage/products/optima-pizza-express-napoli-pizza-oven
The only fly in the ointment is that they very definitely do not deliver on Amazon Prime timescales.
And I've had the first bike run of the year. Just a few miles, but a start.1 -
Well, there are basically only two loyalty schemes of great size - Star Alliance and OneWorld. If you're not BA-ing, you probably want something in the Star Alliance programme. (Other smaller alternatives are Air France-KLM and Virgin Atlantic.)MaxPB said:Right, now that I'm no longer tied into BA, wondering whether it's worth starting a new loyalty scheme. The new BA CEO seems better than Cruz but not by enough to get me to commit long term. What other choices have I got PB frequent fliers?
Personally, I am so near Gold For Life (33k/35k tier points), there's no point in me changing until I get there. But I'm also pretty fond of the Virgin transatlantic product.0 -
Wikipedia says Keele and Essex:-rcs1000 said:
Didn't she go to Cambridge?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
She [Priti Patel] attended a comprehensive girls school in Watford, Hertfordshire before going on to study economics at Keele University and then pursuing postgraduate studies in British government and politics at the University of Essex.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priti_Patel#Early_life
Not even Eton.0 -
Battlestations!
That's the word I've been trying to remember for the last 10 mins.
https://www.reddit.com/r/battlestations/1 -
Gary Streeter - first elected Tory MP in 1992 - submits letter of no confidence
"I cannot reconcile the pain and sacrifice of the vast majority of the British Public during lockdown with the attitude and activities of those working in Downing Street"
https://www.facebook.com/garystreeterSWD/posts/48277888773060531 -
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror0 -
Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak
2m
Gary Streeter becomes 3rd Tory MP today to say he's submitted letter to try to trigger a vote of no confidence in the PM1 -
I vouch for her. A bit of a flyer, I admit.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Wikipedia says Keele and Essex:-rcs1000 said:
Didn't she go to Cambridge?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
She [Priti Patel] attended a comprehensive girls school in Watford, Hertfordshire before going on to study economics at Keele University and then pursuing postgraduate studies in British government and politics at the University of Essex.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priti_Patel#Early_life
Not even Eton.0 -
The PM’s Savile remark, and his refusal to withdraw it, are going down awfully with the One Nation crowd of Tory MPs. It’s pushed some to tipping point and there’s talk of at least one more MP going public with a letter before the day’s over. https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/14888996051274793041
-
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.
3 -
Johnson faces a shire Tory rebellion, including MPs you may never have heard of...solid constituency MPs - not "the usual suspects". https://www.ft.com/content/3003a825-5985-4fbe-8949-0c7d717513b81
-
Nothing alleged about it.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
The thing that scares me was the fact she believed nobody innocent is ever convicted.0 -
Bang on 5.00 pm. As predicted by @AVMikhailova. Clear coordination now. Clear it’s not going to stop.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1488921672866574340
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/14889207417184092160 -
A contemporary of Liz Kendall at her Watford school.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Wikipedia says Keele and Essex:-rcs1000 said:
Didn't she go to Cambridge?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
She [Priti Patel] attended a comprehensive girls school in Watford, Hertfordshire before going on to study economics at Keele University and then pursuing postgraduate studies in British government and politics at the University of Essex.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priti_Patel#Early_life
Not even Eton.1 -
I totally agree with that, but there's another question: how many high-speed routes go through massively scenic areas? For instance, the first phase of HS2 goes between London and Birmingham. I've walked the Grand Union Canal between the two places, and been on the train many times, and there's nothing too spectacular - even in the Tring area.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
Also, much of HS2 is going to be in tunnels. There's little point in looking out of the windows in that case.
So perhaps high-speed rail should be seen as a way of getting to the scenic journeys faster.
0 -
Do you have any links to studies from these countries evidencing that "it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights"? For example, that attacks on female prisoners have not increased since the change was made?kinabalu said:
When looking at a reform it's relevant where else it has been done and with what impact. People are saying self-Id is a perverts charter and an attack on women's rights, yet several countries have adopted self-Id and it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights. Germany is about to join these countries. When the UK government looked at this in 2018 they concluded that self-Id was a positive reform - because it would help this minority and harm nobody else. The Women & Equalities Committee of the HoC has recently re-endorsed this in their report of Dec 21. There are some solid arguments for this reform. People who are interested should take a look at them.Luckyguy1983 said:
'Those other people are doing it and recommending it' isn't actually an argument in its favour is it? It's the same argument lemmings use when charging over a cliff. If you agree with it, you can surely find a single convincing argument for it other than pointing at the German Government.kinabalu said:
I've posted the report from the relevant House of Commons Committee which after taking evidence from all sides recommends self-Id as the way forward. I've also pointed out that this confirms the conclusions of the UK government when it looked into this previously in 2018. I've further pointed out that several countries have adopted this approach (and have no plans to reverse it) and that Germany is about to. Like it or not these are solid points. I've also sought to explain at length why imo it is illogical (and tbh rather noxious) to present self-Id as being a 'perverts charter'.Cyclefree said:
The one thing you haven't done is posted the rational evidence-led argument in favour. And when I have challenged you on certain consequences of your preference, you have agreed with me eg in relation to being against women being forced to name rapists as women even in a trial, even though this would be the inevitable consequence of self-ID.kinabalu said:
Unfair and a bit of a misrepresentation. On here we tend to get this debate presented as if all the rational, evidence-led argument is on the side of those opposed to trans self-Id and inclusion. I try to correct that by posting the rational, evidence-led argument in favour. Which is considerable.Cyclefree said:Anyway, I
The answer to that, surely, is for Labour to have sensible policies on such issues which don't enrage people so that the Tory party's attempt at culture wars don't work.rkrkrk said:Don't disagree with Cyclefree's header, it's a good catalogue of government failings.
But unless people are prepared to vote this government out, it won't change.
And I worry that the Conservatives are very good at finding issues which enrage otherwise hostile voters and stop them from voting Labour... like trans rights or border crossings or human rights or woke or free speech etc.
It is possible to have such policies. I have suggested some. I dare say I could suggest more. But if you do Labour accuse you of some terrible thought crime or ostracise you or refuse to listen.
Take one example today - it is a year to the day since the death of Maureen Colquhoun, the first openly lesbian Labour MP. She was not treated well by Labour. A Labour group wanted to have some gathering in her memory and invited as a speaker her biographer and personal friend. Then disinvited her because this person thinks the GRA is just fine as it is. So the event is not now going ahead. When Labour behaves in this way to women - when it refuses to debate or listen, when it takes the view that there can only be one view on a topic which is of interest to lots of women for perfectly rational, evidence-based reasons (yes @kinabalu there are plenty even though you choose to ignore them) then it is not the Tories who are doing the enraging but Labour.
Womens' rights matter to me / the rights of children not to be abused / safeguarding and a decent police force one can trust matter to me - as my header today (and plenty more on these topics) would show. But I do not trust Labour on them. So .... they know what they have to do if they want my vote.
Where are Labour's views on police reforms, for instance? Why have the Mayor of London and the Opposition Leader supported the Met Commissioner despite all the evidence against her? Why should I believe that Labour will be any better on this or on child sex abuse etc?
And you stated yesterday something that is patently untrue - namely that trans activists do not want to erase womens' rights. I pointed out that it was the publicly stated position of trans lobby groups to remove all reference to sex in equalities legislation and to all sex-based exemptions in the Equality Act. This would remove womens' current rights. I also asked you how women would be able to take action against discrimination on the grounds of sex under the Equal Pay Act if sex was no longer a relevant category. What sort of comparator would be used and how?
So it seems to me that you do not fully understand the consequences of what you propose.
For the record, I am not opposed in the slightest to the existing rights trans people (ie those with gender dysphoria have) - those legal rights are exactly the same as everyone else has - nor do I wish to take any away. What I do oppose is the campaigns to remove womens' rights both in law and in practice. You would do well to understand how self-ID does impact on those rights and why women are concerned.
I did *not* in my post yesterday opine on what 'trans activists' do or don't want to do. What I said was that the pro trans argument isn't 100% owned by a collection of foaming twitter activists hellbent on trampling all over women's rights. Eg I'm not a trans activist (as if!) but I recognize the strength of the case for self-Id. This doesn't mean I wish to obliterate all reference to sex in the laws of the country or to abolish the whole concept of birth sex in favour of gender. Others may argue for this but that's a matter for them. It certainly doesn't follow automatically from having a less burdensome, de-medicalized gender transition process based predominantly on self-Id.1 -
I’m always surprised she got through a year or two at Essex U alive with her right-wing views!DecrepiterJohnL said:
Wikipedia says Keele and Essex:-rcs1000 said:
Didn't she go to Cambridge?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
She [Priti Patel] attended a comprehensive girls school in Watford, Hertfordshire before going on to study economics at Keele University and then pursuing postgraduate studies in British government and politics at the University of Essex.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priti_Patel#Early_life
Not even Eton.0 -
A fair point. A great airline route is actually better than high speed rail. I was wrongFoxy said:
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.
flying across the Alps in clear weather is always fun. I also remember a flight across the Greenland Ice Cap from Iceland to ilullisat. OMG!
And seaplanes, I do love a seaplane. Sydney to Pittwater. Colombo to the Sri Lankan highlands. Anywhere in the Maldives to anywhere else. Seaplanes are brilliant0 -
Yeah I'm only at around a third of that so I'm not fussed to try and get lifetime status and I've been less and less impressed by BA since I started seriously flying for business in 2014 and the Japanese execs seem unimpressed by JAL. Yet I'm booking the US in for a personal holiday and Star Alliance options seem crap as well.rcs1000 said:
Well, there are basically only two loyalty schemes of great size - Star Alliance and OneWorld. If you're not BA-ing, you probably want something in the Star Alliance programme. (Other smaller alternatives are Air France-KLM and Virgin Atlantic.)MaxPB said:Right, now that I'm no longer tied into BA, wondering whether it's worth starting a new loyalty scheme. The new BA CEO seems better than Cruz but not by enough to get me to commit long term. What other choices have I got PB frequent fliers?
Personally, I am so near Gold For Life (33k/35k tier points), there's no point in me changing until I get there. But I'm also pretty fond of the Virgin transatlantic product.0 -
On the smirking bit, she has a habit of only smiling with mouth closed, which makes her look like she's smirking. In the clip of Johnson failing to open an umbrella, she actually does a proper smile and suddenly looks much more sympathetic. I have a friend who also only does closed mouth smiles for photos etc and looks a numpty/smirker, in her case because she believes she has bad teeth.Farooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
For me, as a liberal, the big problem is her authoritarian instincts. The lying etc doesn't help either, but I'm horrified by a Patel administration far more than a Johnson administration and I'm not exactly delighted about that, either.3 -
Worth looking at American's and Alaska's loyalty programmes I think. There are a few articles on the web comparing them for accrual, you'd probably also get a helpful response on headforpoints or flyertalk if you pose the question.MaxPB said:
New York, San Francisco and Tokyo for business in club class. With points I'd probably go to Asia. The company doesn't have a preferred airline for 2022 at least but will probably partner with ANA or JAL, last time out we had JAL but the Japanese execs weren't happy with them. Bonus points if they serve Haneda.occasionalranter said:
Where do you fly to, what class (if cash), where would you like to fly on points in first/business on a redemption ?MaxPB said:Right, now that I'm no longer tied into BA, wondering whether it's worth starting a new loyalty scheme. The new BA CEO seems better than Cruz but not by enough to get me to commit long term. What other choices have I got PB frequent fliers?
I am with American's AAdvantage program. Originally because I inherited half a million points (!) but have been happy to stick with them. Have never been tempted by Avios, mainly because I'm not tempted to ever actually fly with BA so don't care about the 2-4-1 voucher. They are also rubbish for redemptions, even through oneworld partners: crappy seats (though that is improving with the new club suite), disinterested cabin crew, hefty fuel charges, charging for seat reservations even in business class. Donnez-moi un break !0 -
I agree although I do think that when a incredibly well known person is accused of something this heinous and the police have forwarded 4 seperate potential prosecutions, then someone senior would have made the decision to not prosecute.rcs1000 said:
The problem we have is that we don't know how much evidence there was, whether the girls themselves (or their parents) wanted to testify, etc. The CPS has a limited budget, and their goal - always - is going to be to maximise the number of successful prosecutions. If something is seen as difficult - perhaps because the primary witnesses would struggle on the stand - then one can see why it might get dropped.NerysHughes said:
You are correct , it was when SKS was DPP that 4 cases from Surrey and Sussex police against Jimmy Saville for the rape of learning disabled girls under the age of 16 were dropped by the CPS.tlg86 said:
The Guardian:kjh said:
Same here. As I said Nazir, I think, was clear on the matter, yet dates seem to contradict that and I trust Nazir so I suspect that there is more to this that we don't know in terms of events and dates.tlg86 said:
This is the reference:kjh said:
We do have a bit of a conflict there don't we? I don't want to slag off Wikipedia as, as far as I am concerned, it is God. I can only assume there is some other explanation relating to an earlier date.tlg86 said:
Wikipedia says:TheScreamingEagles said:
AIUI it was analogous to David Cameron apologising for Bloody Sunday.tlg86 said:
So Starmer's apology was for stuff that happened before he was DPP? I didn't realise that.kjh said:
This was covered by Nazir Afzal this morning. Let's hope I get this right, probably not fully, so please correct where I have it wrong.tlg86 said:
Not sure that's quite the same. Ministers make decisions and I doubt that got to the top of the department (terrible as it was).Carnyx said:
He was given a pass to a sensitive NHS site with the decision made at a very high level of the Dept of Health. The Tories were running the country at the time. What I am not sure is whether the relevant Minister knew, but there is such a thing as responsibility fo r one'sa department (though that is conspicously lacking in Mr Johnson). And if the Tories are complaining about SKS and his running of the DPP, they might like to consider how compliciot they were in actually facilitating the crimes.HYUFD said:
Savile also was invited to Chequers by BlairTheScreamingEagles said:
Actually I believe it.kle4 said:
Both of them. Obviously he wont retract as he's already double downed, and those who've not already put in a letter would be pushed over the edge in defence of Keir? Give me a break.eek said:Filing under things that ain't ever going to happen
The Times
@thetimes
Up-pointing red triangle JUST IN: Boris Johnson has been warned that more Tory MPs will put in letters of no confidence unless he retracts his claim that Sir Keir Starmer failed to prosecute Jimmy Savile when he was director of public prosecutions
In my call earlier, it'll be a race to the bottom, as it legitimises this.
I don't expect Starmer to rise to it, but some leftie outrider will.
Thatcher "responded by inviting the now-disgraced DJ to lunch at Chequers, spending 11 consecutive New Year’s Eves with him and overseeing his knighthood"
https://twitter.com/andrewspoooner/status/1488823436113854465
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/scots-pop-guru-alan-mcgee-23546990
I'd be curious to know what sort of cases get reviewed by the DPP. Savile was quite high profile, so I'm slightly surprised that it didn't make its way to the top of the CPS.
The police incorrectly told victims and the CPS that there were no other incidents other than theirs and each case was not put together with the others. So on the basis of 1 complaint in each case the CPS decided there wasn't the evidence to prosecute that case. Nasir also covered something regarding the independence of the prosecution, which I didn't really follow, but meant that the Director of the CPS would not be aware of this. He also pointed out that Starmer wasn't at the CPS at this time (rather important) After Starmer was appointed he appointed Nasir to review the problem of child abuse cases not being prosecuted and the prosecution rate significantly improved. So in fact Starmer was not only not responsible for the Saville failures but actually was instrumental in resolving the issues. In addition Nasir made an astounding claim (bearing in mind liable) re Johnson making a previous statement (I assume an article) about child abuse cases and spaffing money up the wall.
Sadly my recollection is not as good as hearing it first hand but it was rather damning.
I don't know if records are kept regarding complaints. It's a shame that when others came forward, no one knew that it wasn't the first time an allegation had been made.
Didn't happen on his watch but as the incumbent it fell to him to apologise.
On 24 October 2012 the Crown Prosecution Service said the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, would review the service's decisions not to prosecute Savile in 2009 in relation to four claims against him for sexual abuse dating back to the 1970s.
SKS was DPP in 2009.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9630550/Jimmy-Savile-What-George-Entwistle-told-MPs-about-Panorama-justthewomen-Newsnight-and-the-conversation-at-the-Hilton-Hotel.html
I don't have a Telegraph account, so can't read it.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/24/jimmy-savile-dpp-2009-evidence
Cameron told the house that the DPP had ordered a review of the evidence considered by the CPS in 2009 relating to indecent assault allegations against Savile from the 1970s. The evidence was submitted by Surrey police, which began an investigation in 2007.
Fairly conclusive that this was on SKS's watch, not that I hold it against him. Whether or not it should have been escalated to the DPP in the first place, I don't know.
I have absolutely no idea how the CPS works but I would imagine that for such a high profile case someone senior took the decision.
It's easy with the benefit of hindsight to say 'Savile was a wrong-un'. But did the CPS/DPP know that? Or did they just think that the chances of a conviction were not great, that the witnesses parents did not want them grilled on the stand, and see a better use of scarce resources elsewhere?
I do follow potential miscarriages of justice as a bit of a hobby and some cases where people are in prison for murder, its hard to see how the case ever got to court as the evidence was so weak, yet the CPS authorised a prosecution, a great example being Roger Kearney who was convicted of the murder of his lover Paula Poolton whose body was found at a train station very close to where I live. In his case there was no direct evidence and no circumstantial evidence. DNA that was found in the boot next to her body which was not his. His wife also gave him an alibi for the night the murder happened. Despite this a case was bought and the jury found him guilty. He can't appeal becuase he cannot contradict the evidence he was convicted on as there was not any. The fact that he was her lover was enough for a conviction.
My point is that the CPS regulalry pursue prosecutions where there is limited evidence, sometimes succesfully sometimes not. The Saville case must have been one of the most important decisions of that year and the decision to not prosecute would not have been taken lightly and I would have thought that very senior people within the CPS were aware of the case at the time.1 -
I don't like her opinions at all but I don't really get why she is disliked more than other Tories. She doesn't trigger me like she triggers some people. I think she's an effective political operator.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror0 -
No RoBMalmesbury said:
Great Barrington Declaration supporter publishes paper in favour of Great Barrington Declaration.....Andy_JS said:John Hopkins University.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10466995/New-study-says-lockdowns-reduced-COVID-mortality-2-percent.html
"Lockdowns, school closures and limiting gatherings only reduced COVID mortality by 0.2% at 'enormous economic and social costs', study finds
Meta-analysis of 24 studies found Covid lockdown restrictions caused just 0.2% reduction in virus deaths
Economists who carried out review said border closures had virtually zero effect on Covid mortality (-0.1%)
However, researchers found closing nonessential shops was most effective intervention, causing 10.6% fall"
Surprise!
Shock!
Horror!
No I^2 value given.
Not a meta-analysis by the methodology of meta-analyses (either Cochrane or PRISMA - and they state they used PRISMA for selection of studies, but didn't bother with the Risk of Bias study or the heterogeneity value.
Not peer-reviewed.
Written by authors affilliated with the AEIR (behind both the GBD and the antivaxxer Brownstone Institute).
Hmm.0 -
A wonderful endorsement of Essex U.OldKingCole said:
I’m always surprised she got through a year or two at Essex U alive with her right-wing views!DecrepiterJohnL said:
Wikipedia says Keele and Essex:-rcs1000 said:
Didn't she go to Cambridge?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Priti also annoys those who value height, received pronunciation and Oxbridge.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
She [Priti Patel] attended a comprehensive girls school in Watford, Hertfordshire before going on to study economics at Keele University and then pursuing postgraduate studies in British government and politics at the University of Essex.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priti_Patel#Early_life
Not even Eton.0 -
Excellent stuff - when is the next one coming?Scott_xP said:Bang on 5.00 pm. As predicted by @AVMikhailova. Clear coordination now. Clear it’s not going to stop.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1488921672866574340
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/14889207417184092160 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DrsVhzbLzULeon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
0 -
She was speaking at a Leave meeting in the run up to the referendum in 2016, so I went along to see her. I reported on it here at the time.Farooq said:
I can assure you of one thing: you won't find a singular cause. Yes, you can name aspects like that, yes, death penalty, fair point, but the whole will be greater than the sum of the parts. It's at least partly irrational, possibly mostly.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
She was far from the most capable speaker on the bill. Indeed the Business for Leave speaker was considerably more articulate. Her answers were evasive in the typical politicians media style, even though it couldn't have been an easier audience. I came away under whelmed by her.
I am green on her for next leader though.
0 -
For me, putting aside the fact she's a disgraced national security risk, is here hypocrisy, she's enacting policies and rhetoric which if it had applied to her parents, then they would have never been allowed to settle in the UK.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't like her opinions at all but I don't really get why she is disliked more than other Tories. She doesn't trigger me like she triggers some people. I think she's an effective political operator.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror1 -
+1 for the Phoenix route (my second longhaul flight and my first in business, I think).Foxy said:
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.
Athens to Rome late on a winter afternoon: harsh golden horizontal sun on the gulfs of Corinth and Patras and the Antirrio bridge, then over the Ionian islands and up the instep of Italy with the Puglian coast to the right before crossing Basilicata and rounding Vesuvius at dusk. Spectacular enough to watch the whole flight without opening a book once.0 -
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror4 -
I'll stand for her. Pistols?MaxPB said:
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror0 -
I think that's the least of reasons to criticise her, personally. I don't see that someone should feel bound to a political policy decision based on who their parents were and what policies applied to those parents. I think there are good enough reasons to criticise her positions without adding on 'Her own policies would not have worked out well for her parents'. Maybe so, maybe not, but either a policy is good or it isn't, and how it might have applied to a parent seems irrelevant.TheScreamingEagles said:
For me, putting aside the fact she's a disgraced national security risk, is here hypocrisy, she's enacting policies and rhetoric which if it had applied to her parents, then they would have never been allowed to settle in the UK.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't like her opinions at all but I don't really get why she is disliked more than other Tories. She doesn't trigger me like she triggers some people. I think she's an effective political operator.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
It might make a political position more surprising, but we've probably all met longer standing immigrants who are opposed to more immigration as an example.0 -
Santiago to Teniente Vidal (Chile) for me. Right down the Andes/west coast with spectacular views of both before descending to a near invisible airport that pops into sight at the last moment.Foxy said:
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.0 -
That Levelling Up White paper is great, isn't it? Yet another regurgitated promise of rolling out 5G, some vacuous stuff about improving local transport, and more devolution if the locals want it. I'm sure voters in the Red Wall will come flooding back to Johnson now.0
-
What a load of old pants. We’ve been extra-judicially executing people for decades, via drone. Obama loved doing it. Suddenly if we do it at home its omg no ewwwwwwAnabobazina said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DrsVhzbLzULeon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
Spare me this liberal cant0 -
That't unlikely to be true, her parents were very likely in the same proverbial boat as my grandparents and parents, British citizens in the Empire which made resettlement pretty straightforwards. Additionally, she's extended a similar programme that her parents would have had to Hong Kongers, another group of people who have claim to some kind of British citizenship and she's made it easier for them to resettle in the UK.TheScreamingEagles said:
For me, putting aside the fact she's a disgraced national security risk, is here hypocrisy, she's enacting policies and rhetoric which if it had applied to her parents, then they would have never been allowed to settle in the UK.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't like her opinions at all but I don't really get why she is disliked more than other Tories. She doesn't trigger me like she triggers some people. I think she's an effective political operator.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
This is a meme that is repeated across lefty types, it's untrue and I'm surprised you've fallen for it.3 -
Well a woman of colour in the conservative party? How dare she! Bit alarming to hear @TSE say that she believes no innocent people have ever been convicted when that's so easy to prove wrong. I don't think she'd be a good prime minister and with her past record I cant see her honesty and behaviour as a minister suggesting she'd be much of an improvement on the current oaf.MaxPB said:
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror1 -
Sunak has three big obstacles:Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html
Maxed out on tax, spend, debt and deficit
Stayed in cabinet when everyone else knew the government and leader was in the wrong and that the only moral course was to say so and resign (was the Savile slur the last new excuse giving clear grounds to do this?)
The billions of payments to fraudulent bogus companies which a nine year old would have spotted coming down the tracks
0 -
Exclusive: Ex-civil service chief attended Downing Street party being investigated by police By @HarryYorke1
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/02/exclusive-ex-civil-service-chief-attended-downing-street-party/0 -
Never rouse the Shires, basic rule for a Tory PM I'd think. It's why the planning rule changes were junked.Scott_xP said:Johnson faces a shire Tory rebellion, including MPs you may never have heard of...solid constituency MPs - not "the usual suspects". https://www.ft.com/content/3003a825-5985-4fbe-8949-0c7d717513b8
1 -
Not sure that is true. They don't seem to have the same hatred for Sunak. She comes across to me as really very smug. I find that irritating, plus the fact that her views are strongly populist.MaxPB said:
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror1 -
Not everyone will think that, obviously, but I doubt it will take long to find examples of that sentiment.Farooq said:
Wait what?MaxPB said:
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
Personally part of why I'm more suspicious of Patel compared to others is based on who seems to like her most or who she is trying to please with 'tough on the boats' stuff and the like.1 -
In Liz we Trusst ?Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html 0 -
I am with you on most, except Hoyle. Think he is doing a good job. I think smugness is the commonality with the other three. Smug with little to be smug about.Farooq said:I've been thinking more about the politicians who wind me up to an inexplicable level:
Patel
Blackford
Hoyle
Nandy
I dislike each of them far more than I should. What do they have in common? I can't think of anything.2 -
Clinton began it with cruise missiles. Given the way that cruise missiles got modified for insight video transmission, and control, they have sort of become one-way-drones, now.....Leon said:
What a load of old pants. We’ve been extra-judicially executing people for decades, via drone. Obama loved doing it. Suddenly if we do it at home its omg no ewwwwwwAnabobazina said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DrsVhzbLzULeon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
Spare me this liberal cant0 -
On staying in cabinet, you can throw that argument at Starmer, who seemed quite at home in Corbyn's shadow cabinet.algarkirk said:
Sunak has three big obstacles:Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html
Maxed out on tax, spend, debt and deficit
Stayed in cabinet when everyone else knew the government and leader was in the wrong and that the only moral course was to say so and resign (was the Savile slur the last new excuse giving clear grounds to do this?)
The billions of payments to fraudulent bogus companies which a nine year old would have spotted coming down the tracks
I suspect that quite a few conservative MP's were hoping to keep Johnson until the catastrophic local elections in May as the right time to knife him. New leader installed in time for the conference. Reset the direction, 18 months to bed in, with somejudicious tax cuts bribes to electorate and bingo...
Sadly the oaf is not even capable of lasting this long.0 -
Seems there is lot of silliness on trans rights on these boards just as there is from self indulgent commentators in the Times and the Observer. Tom Harwood on GB news has far more sensible views on trans rights and has pointed out that prisoners are already assessed on an individual basis.Endillion said:
Do you have any links to studies from these countries evidencing that "it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights"? For example, that attacks on female prisoners have not increased since the change was made?kinabalu said:
When looking at a reform it's relevant where else it has been done and with what impact. People are saying self-Id is a perverts charter and an attack on women's rights, yet several countries have adopted self-Id and it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights. Germany is about to join these countries. When the UK government looked at this in 2018 they concluded that self-Id was a positive reform - because it would help this minority and harm nobody else. The Women & Equalities Committee of the HoC has recently re-endorsed this in their report of Dec 21. There are some solid arguments for this reform. People who are interested should take a look at them.Luckyguy1983 said:
'Those other people are doing it and recommending it' isn't actually an argument in its favour is it? It's the same argument lemmings use when charging over a cliff. If you agree with it, you can surely find a single convincing argument for it other than pointing at the German Government.kinabalu said:
I've posted the report from the relevant House of Commons Committee which after taking evidence from all sides recommends self-Id as the way forward. I've also pointed out that this confirms the conclusions of the UK government when it looked into this previously in 2018. I've further pointed out that several countries have adopted this approach (and have no plans to reverse it) and that Germany is about to. Like it or not these are solid points. I've also sought to explain at length why imo it is illogical (and tbh rather noxious) to present self-Id as being a 'perverts charter'.Cyclefree said:
The one thing you haven't done is posted the rational evidence-led argument in favour. And when I have challenged you on certain consequences of your preference, you have agreed with me eg in relation to being against women being forced to name rapists as women even in a trial, even though this would be the inevitable consequence of self-ID.kinabalu said:
Unfair and a bit of a misrepresentation. On here we tend to get this debate presented as if all the rational, evidence-led argument is on the side of those opposed to trans self-Id and inclusion. I try to correct that by posting the rational, evidence-led argument in favour. Which is considerable.Cyclefree said:Anyway, I
The answer to that, surely, is for Labour to have sensible policies on such issues which don't enrage people so that the Tory party's attempt at culture wars don't work.rkrkrk said:Don't disagree with Cyclefree's header, it's a good catalogue of government failings.
But unless people are prepared to vote this government out, it won't change.
And I worry that the Conservatives are very good at finding issues which enrage otherwise hostile voters and stop them from voting Labour... like trans rights or border crossings or human rights or woke or free speech etc.
It is possible to have such policies. I have suggested some. I dare say I could suggest more. But if you do Labour accuse you of some terrible thought crime or ostracise you or refuse to listen.
Take one example today - it is a year to the day since the death of Maureen Colquhoun, the first openly lesbian Labour MP. She was not treated well by Labour. A Labour group wanted to have some gathering in her memory and invited as a speaker her biographer and personal friend. Then disinvited her because this person thinks the GRA is just fine as it is. So the event is not now going ahead. When Labour behaves in this way to women - when it refuses to debate or listen, when it takes the view that there can only be one view on a topic which is of interest to lots of women for perfectly rational, evidence-based reasons (yes @kinabalu there are plenty even though you choose to ignore them) then it is not the Tories who are doing the enraging but Labour.
Womens' rights matter to me / the rights of children not to be abused / safeguarding and a decent police force one can trust matter to me - as my header today (and plenty more on these topics) would show. But I do not trust Labour on them. So .... they know what they have to do if they want my vote.
Where are Labour's views on police reforms, for instance? Why have the Mayor of London and the Opposition Leader supported the Met Commissioner despite all the evidence against her? Why should I believe that Labour will be any better on this or on child sex abuse etc?
And you stated yesterday something that is patently untrue - namely that trans activists do not want to erase womens' rights. I pointed out that it was the publicly stated position of trans lobby groups to remove all reference to sex in equalities legislation and to all sex-based exemptions in the Equality Act. This would remove womens' current rights. I also asked you how women would be able to take action against discrimination on the grounds of sex under the Equal Pay Act if sex was no longer a relevant category. What sort of comparator would be used and how?
So it seems to me that you do not fully understand the consequences of what you propose.
For the record, I am not opposed in the slightest to the existing rights trans people (ie those with gender dysphoria have) - those legal rights are exactly the same as everyone else has - nor do I wish to take any away. What I do oppose is the campaigns to remove womens' rights both in law and in practice. You would do well to understand how self-ID does impact on those rights and why women are concerned.
I did *not* in my post yesterday opine on what 'trans activists' do or don't want to do. What I said was that the pro trans argument isn't 100% owned by a collection of foaming twitter activists hellbent on trampling all over women's rights. Eg I'm not a trans activist (as if!) but I recognize the strength of the case for self-Id. This doesn't mean I wish to obliterate all reference to sex in the laws of the country or to abolish the whole concept of birth sex in favour of gender. Others may argue for this but that's a matter for them. It certainly doesn't follow automatically from having a less burdensome, de-medicalized gender transition process based predominantly on self-Id.
Germany seems a lot better on trans rights and there is no controversy in their gvt about it.
I don't think people like Rosie Duffield and cyclefree understand the equality act and if they do they want to repeal parts of it.0 -
A lot of that is the fault of the banks who processed the loans and did no work at all to check who got what. 1 obvious starting point that could be done is refusing to refund loans made to companies that were created after Covid appearedalgarkirk said:
Sunak has three big obstacles:Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html
Maxed out on tax, spend, debt and deficit
Stayed in cabinet when everyone else knew the government and leader was in the wrong and that the only moral course was to say so and resign (was the Savile slur the last new excuse giving clear grounds to do this?)
The billions of payments to fraudulent bogus companies which a nine year old would have spotted coming down the tracks
This is another example of where the blame lies 100% with the bank giving the same director multiple loans
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-597612940 -
** Brexit flashback **
NEW Labour is backing a plan to use a 'humble address' to force the publication of the full Sue Gray report.
Sir Lyndsay Hoyle is likely to look favourably on it.
One Commons source asks "Would Theresa May table it?" More in Chopper's Politics Newsletter.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/14889268635820236821 -
Speaker Hoyle is a massive step up on the previous incumbent in the chair... at least he doesn't try and make all about him and he doesn't make up the rules as he goes along... And I doubt he'll ever be accused of bullying his staff...Farooq said:I've been thinking more about the politicians who wind me up to an inexplicable level:
Patel
Blackford
Hoyle
Nandy
I dislike each of them far more than I should. What do they have in common? I can't think of anything.9 -
Here's mine, or at least the view (taken sitting at my desk through the screen):Malmesbury said:
Here's mineFrancisUrquhart said:
I believe you, about as much as I believe Boris over not attending any parties ;-)TheScreamingEagles said:My current office.
3 -
I think that has been bubbling for a while. Most Tory MPs are decent people. Johnson's behaviour is an anathema to them and their constituents.kle4 said:
Never rouse the Shires, basic rule for a Tory PM I'd think. It's why the planning rule changes were junked.Scott_xP said:Johnson faces a shire Tory rebellion, including MPs you may never have heard of...solid constituency MPs - not "the usual suspects". https://www.ft.com/content/3003a825-5985-4fbe-8949-0c7d717513b8
4 -
Her parents got out of Uganda not too long before Amin started getting antsy. If they hadn’t I certainly have campaigned for them to be allowed here. As I did for hundreds of others.MaxPB said:
That't unlikely to be true, her parents were very likely in the same proverbial boat as my grandparents and parents, British citizens in the Empire which made resettlement pretty straightforwards. Additionally, she's extended a similar programme that her parents would have had to Hong Kongers, another group of people who have claim to some kind of British citizenship and she's made it easier for them to resettle in the UK.TheScreamingEagles said:
For me, putting aside the fact she's a disgraced national security risk, is here hypocrisy, she's enacting policies and rhetoric which if it had applied to her parents, then they would have never been allowed to settle in the UK.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I don't like her opinions at all but I don't really get why she is disliked more than other Tories. She doesn't trigger me like she triggers some people. I think she's an effective political operator.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
This is a meme that is repeated across lefty types, it's untrue and I'm surprised you've fallen for it.0 -
NEW Michael Ashcroft's biography of Carrie Johnson is published on Mar 22
It will "offer the electorate the chance to assess exactly what role she plays in Boris Johnson’s unpredictable administration and why that matters", the publisher says
More in Chopper's Politics Newsletter
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/14889273637526773850 -
Remember. We haven’t had all the parties yet. We haven’t had the photos yet. We haven’t had the fixed penalty notices yet. We haven’t had Sue Gray 2 yet.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/14889272119482859711 -
Its not just her rather demented right wing views and her more or less unconstitutional activities in offfice, but the fact that the allegations about work place bullying would, in the private sector, have had her fired some time ago.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
She´s basically NBG at the job, and a weak link in a stunningly low quality cabinet5 -
The Good Lord cashing in before (or just after) the Johnson's are history?Scott_xP said:NEW Michael Ashcroft's biography of Carrie Johnson is published on Mar 22
It will "offer the electorate the chance to assess exactly what role she plays in Boris Johnson’s unpredictable administration and why that matters", the publisher says
More in Chopper's Politics Newsletter
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1488927363752677385 0 -
I flew from St Thomas to Puerto Rico in the late Seventies with this eccentric airline:Leon said:
A fair point. A great airline route is actually better than high speed rail. I was wrongFoxy said:
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.
flying across the Alps in clear weather is always fun. I also remember a flight across the Greenland Ice Cap from Iceland to ilullisat. OMG!
And seaplanes, I do love a seaplane. Sydney to Pittwater. Colombo to the Sri Lankan highlands. Anywhere in the Maldives to anywhere else. Seaplanes are brilliant
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilles_Air_Boats
The pilot was the only crew, and the co-pilot seat had the instruments removed to turn it into another passenger seat. Alas, my brother got that one. After taxiing down the ramp into the water the pilot had to handcraft up the wheels before taking off from the harbour.
The whole airline was a bit heath Robinson, and unfortunately the founder died in one of the planes shortly after, but a great experience while it lasted.1 -
Prisoners are currently assessed on an individual basis, because when we let then "self-ID" themselves, there was a spate of rapes in women's prisons. If we change the law, we lose the ability to perform those individual assessments.Gary_Burton said:
Seems there is lot of silliness on trans rights on these boards just as there is from self indulgent commentators in the Times and the Observer. Tom Harwood on GB news has far more sensible views on trans rights and has pointed out that prisoners are already assessed on an individual basis.Endillion said:
Do you have any links to studies from these countries evidencing that "it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights"? For example, that attacks on female prisoners have not increased since the change was made?kinabalu said:
When looking at a reform it's relevant where else it has been done and with what impact. People are saying self-Id is a perverts charter and an attack on women's rights, yet several countries have adopted self-Id and it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights. Germany is about to join these countries. When the UK government looked at this in 2018 they concluded that self-Id was a positive reform - because it would help this minority and harm nobody else. The Women & Equalities Committee of the HoC has recently re-endorsed this in their report of Dec 21. There are some solid arguments for this reform. People who are interested should take a look at them.Luckyguy1983 said:
'Those other people are doing it and recommending it' isn't actually an argument in its favour is it? It's the same argument lemmings use when charging over a cliff. If you agree with it, you can surely find a single convincing argument for it other than pointing at the German Government.kinabalu said:
I've posted the report from the relevant House of Commons Committee which after taking evidence from all sides recommends self-Id as the way forward. I've also pointed out that this confirms the conclusions of the UK government when it looked into this previously in 2018. I've further pointed out that several countries have adopted this approach (and have no plans to reverse it) and that Germany is about to. Like it or not these are solid points. I've also sought to explain at length why imo it is illogical (and tbh rather noxious) to present self-Id as being a 'perverts charter'.Cyclefree said:
The one thing you haven't done is posted the rational evidence-led argument in favour. And when I have challenged you on certain consequences of your preference, you have agreed with me eg in relation to being against women being forced to name rapists as women even in a trial, even though this would be the inevitable consequence of self-ID.kinabalu said:
Unfair and a bit of a misrepresentation. On here we tend to get this debate presented as if all the rational, evidence-led argument is on the side of those opposed to trans self-Id and inclusion. I try to correct that by posting the rational, evidence-led argument in favour. Which is considerable.Cyclefree said:Anyway, I
The answer to that, surely, is for Labour to have sensible policies on such issues which don't enrage people so that the Tory party's attempt at culture wars don't work.rkrkrk said:Don't disagree with Cyclefree's header, it's a good catalogue of government failings.
But unless people are prepared to vote this government out, it won't change.
And I worry that the Conservatives are very good at finding issues which enrage otherwise hostile voters and stop them from voting Labour... like trans rights or border crossings or human rights or woke or free speech etc.
It is possible to have such policies. I have suggested some. I dare say I could suggest more. But if you do Labour accuse you of some terrible thought crime or ostracise you or refuse to listen.
Take one example today - it is a year to the day since the death of Maureen Colquhoun, the first openly lesbian Labour MP. She was not treated well by Labour. A Labour group wanted to have some gathering in her memory and invited as a speaker her biographer and personal friend. Then disinvited her because this person thinks the GRA is just fine as it is. So the event is not now going ahead. When Labour behaves in this way to women - when it refuses to debate or listen, when it takes the view that there can only be one view on a topic which is of interest to lots of women for perfectly rational, evidence-based reasons (yes @kinabalu there are plenty even though you choose to ignore them) then it is not the Tories who are doing the enraging but Labour.
Womens' rights matter to me / the rights of children not to be abused / safeguarding and a decent police force one can trust matter to me - as my header today (and plenty more on these topics) would show. But I do not trust Labour on them. So .... they know what they have to do if they want my vote.
Where are Labour's views on police reforms, for instance? Why have the Mayor of London and the Opposition Leader supported the Met Commissioner despite all the evidence against her? Why should I believe that Labour will be any better on this or on child sex abuse etc?
And you stated yesterday something that is patently untrue - namely that trans activists do not want to erase womens' rights. I pointed out that it was the publicly stated position of trans lobby groups to remove all reference to sex in equalities legislation and to all sex-based exemptions in the Equality Act. This would remove womens' current rights. I also asked you how women would be able to take action against discrimination on the grounds of sex under the Equal Pay Act if sex was no longer a relevant category. What sort of comparator would be used and how?
So it seems to me that you do not fully understand the consequences of what you propose.
For the record, I am not opposed in the slightest to the existing rights trans people (ie those with gender dysphoria have) - those legal rights are exactly the same as everyone else has - nor do I wish to take any away. What I do oppose is the campaigns to remove womens' rights both in law and in practice. You would do well to understand how self-ID does impact on those rights and why women are concerned.
I did *not* in my post yesterday opine on what 'trans activists' do or don't want to do. What I said was that the pro trans argument isn't 100% owned by a collection of foaming twitter activists hellbent on trampling all over women's rights. Eg I'm not a trans activist (as if!) but I recognize the strength of the case for self-Id. This doesn't mean I wish to obliterate all reference to sex in the laws of the country or to abolish the whole concept of birth sex in favour of gender. Others may argue for this but that's a matter for them. It certainly doesn't follow automatically from having a less burdensome, de-medicalized gender transition process based predominantly on self-Id.
Germany seems a lot better on trans rights and there is no controversy in their gvt about it.
I don't think people like Rosie Duffield and cyclefree understand the equality act and if they do they want to repeal parts of it.1 -
So in the case of @Cyclefree you are mansplaining a lawyer? Interesting.Gary_Burton said:
Seems there is lot of silliness on trans rights on these boards just as there is from self indulgent commentators in the Times and the Observer. Tom Harwood on GB news has far more sensible views on trans rights and has pointed out that prisoners are already assessed on an individual basis.Endillion said:
Do you have any links to studies from these countries evidencing that "it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights"? For example, that attacks on female prisoners have not increased since the change was made?kinabalu said:
When looking at a reform it's relevant where else it has been done and with what impact. People are saying self-Id is a perverts charter and an attack on women's rights, yet several countries have adopted self-Id and it hasn't been a perverts charter or caused a regression in women's rights. Germany is about to join these countries. When the UK government looked at this in 2018 they concluded that self-Id was a positive reform - because it would help this minority and harm nobody else. The Women & Equalities Committee of the HoC has recently re-endorsed this in their report of Dec 21. There are some solid arguments for this reform. People who are interested should take a look at them.Luckyguy1983 said:
'Those other people are doing it and recommending it' isn't actually an argument in its favour is it? It's the same argument lemmings use when charging over a cliff. If you agree with it, you can surely find a single convincing argument for it other than pointing at the German Government.kinabalu said:
I've posted the report from the relevant House of Commons Committee which after taking evidence from all sides recommends self-Id as the way forward. I've also pointed out that this confirms the conclusions of the UK government when it looked into this previously in 2018. I've further pointed out that several countries have adopted this approach (and have no plans to reverse it) and that Germany is about to. Like it or not these are solid points. I've also sought to explain at length why imo it is illogical (and tbh rather noxious) to present self-Id as being a 'perverts charter'.Cyclefree said:
The one thing you haven't done is posted the rational evidence-led argument in favour. And when I have challenged you on certain consequences of your preference, you have agreed with me eg in relation to being against women being forced to name rapists as women even in a trial, even though this would be the inevitable consequence of self-ID.kinabalu said:
Unfair and a bit of a misrepresentation. On here we tend to get this debate presented as if all the rational, evidence-led argument is on the side of those opposed to trans self-Id and inclusion. I try to correct that by posting the rational, evidence-led argument in favour. Which is considerable.Cyclefree said:Anyway, I
The answer to that, surely, is for Labour to have sensible policies on such issues which don't enrage people so that the Tory party's attempt at culture wars don't work.rkrkrk said:Don't disagree with Cyclefree's header, it's a good catalogue of government failings.
But unless people are prepared to vote this government out, it won't change.
And I worry that the Conservatives are very good at finding issues which enrage otherwise hostile voters and stop them from voting Labour... like trans rights or border crossings or human rights or woke or free speech etc.
It is possible to have such policies. I have suggested some. I dare say I could suggest more. But if you do Labour accuse you of some terrible thought crime or ostracise you or refuse to listen.
Take one example today - it is a year to the day since the death of Maureen Colquhoun, the first openly lesbian Labour MP. She was not treated well by Labour. A Labour group wanted to have some gathering in her memory and invited as a speaker her biographer and personal friend. Then disinvited her because this person thinks the GRA is just fine as it is. So the event is not now going ahead. When Labour behaves in this way to women - when it refuses to debate or listen, when it takes the view that there can only be one view on a topic which is of interest to lots of women for perfectly rational, evidence-based reasons (yes @kinabalu there are plenty even though you choose to ignore them) then it is not the Tories who are doing the enraging but Labour.
Womens' rights matter to me / the rights of children not to be abused / safeguarding and a decent police force one can trust matter to me - as my header today (and plenty more on these topics) would show. But I do not trust Labour on them. So .... they know what they have to do if they want my vote.
Where are Labour's views on police reforms, for instance? Why have the Mayor of London and the Opposition Leader supported the Met Commissioner despite all the evidence against her? Why should I believe that Labour will be any better on this or on child sex abuse etc?
And you stated yesterday something that is patently untrue - namely that trans activists do not want to erase womens' rights. I pointed out that it was the publicly stated position of trans lobby groups to remove all reference to sex in equalities legislation and to all sex-based exemptions in the Equality Act. This would remove womens' current rights. I also asked you how women would be able to take action against discrimination on the grounds of sex under the Equal Pay Act if sex was no longer a relevant category. What sort of comparator would be used and how?
So it seems to me that you do not fully understand the consequences of what you propose.
For the record, I am not opposed in the slightest to the existing rights trans people (ie those with gender dysphoria have) - those legal rights are exactly the same as everyone else has - nor do I wish to take any away. What I do oppose is the campaigns to remove womens' rights both in law and in practice. You would do well to understand how self-ID does impact on those rights and why women are concerned.
I did *not* in my post yesterday opine on what 'trans activists' do or don't want to do. What I said was that the pro trans argument isn't 100% owned by a collection of foaming twitter activists hellbent on trampling all over women's rights. Eg I'm not a trans activist (as if!) but I recognize the strength of the case for self-Id. This doesn't mean I wish to obliterate all reference to sex in the laws of the country or to abolish the whole concept of birth sex in favour of gender. Others may argue for this but that's a matter for them. It certainly doesn't follow automatically from having a less burdensome, de-medicalized gender transition process based predominantly on self-Id.
Germany seems a lot better on trans rights and there is no controversy in their gvt about it.
I don't think people like Rosie Duffield and cyclefree understand the equality act and if they do they want to repeal parts of it.2 -
It's truly ridiculous how the critics of Patel vanish when tested. I really like the idea of an annoyoing, short, Indian, and whirlwind like young lady being in power.1
-
Yes, or Milan-Athens as well, the views over the Croatian Adriatic are stunning, Equally the landing into Ljubljana on a clear day is abasolutely spectacular (but pretty scary in bad weather)Polruan said:
+1 for the Phoenix route (my second longhaul flight and my first in business, I think).Foxy said:
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.
Athens to Rome late on a winter afternoon: harsh golden horizontal sun on the gulfs of Corinth and Patras and the Antirrio bridge, then over the Ionian islands and up the instep of Italy with the Puglian coast to the right before crossing Basilicata and rounding Vesuvius at dusk. Spectacular enough to watch the whole flight without opening a book once.0 -
I’m a fan of Nandy.Farooq said:
Yes, that's an astute point, I hadn't noticed that but it's true.kle4 said:
Not everyone will think that, obviously, but I doubt it will take long to find examples of that sentiment.Farooq said:
Wait what?MaxPB said:
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
Personally part of why I'm more suspicious of Patel compared to others is based on who seems to like her most or who she is trying to please with 'tough on the boats' stuff and the like.
I'm now thinking that the same applies to three of my list of four. They are liked by the "wrong" people.
I don't really know who is a fan of Nandy though... perhaps nobody?
I wish she were LOTO not Keir.
She’s smart and passionate but also articulate and measured.
Watching Keir today, he did OK at PMQs, but there’s something robotic about him.
As for the rest of your list, I don’t mind Hoyle but the reason Patel is loathed is just that’s she’s a thick authoritarian, not “a race traitor” as MaxPB suggests.
PBers seem to have suddenly forgotten the disgraceful policing bills…0 -
She's a disgraced national security risk.Omnium said:It's truly ridiculous how the critics of Patel vanish when tested. I really like the idea of an annoyoing, short, Indian, and whirlwind like young lady being in power.
1 -
I learned today that Brexiteers are concerned he is not strong enough on the NI protocol , even though he is a leaverGIN1138 said:
In Liz we Trusst ?Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html0 -
Not sure what you mean by that? Who does?MaxPB said:
They think she's a race traitor. There's really not more to it than that.Leon said:
My guess is: her alleged support of the Death PenaltyFarooq said:
I find myself unable to explain, which is why I didn't reply to your original post. It's a visceral and wordless hate. I can normally articulate what I like or dislike about someone, but with Patel all I get is the words "SMIRKING GHOUL" and there it stops.Omnium said:
I don't get the why of this.Farooq said:
I read your comment earlier and tried to see it from your point of view. I just can't manage it. I don't think she has anything redeeming about her. I wouldn't even say that about Corbyn or Boris. She might be the worst person in the world.Omnium said:
Everybody agrees with you. It's just me that doesn't understand why.Farooq said:
Honestly, if Patel became PM, I'd join the SNP the same day.Nigel_Foremain said:
Someone else who has a problem with the truth may not be a good replacement. I don't like her, but she would still be an improvement, but then the bar is so low.rcs1000 said:
Well, she annoys lefties because she's very authoritarian.Omnium said:
Smart and wise though..Leon said:
She is genuinely attractive. Phenomenal cheekbonesOldKingCole said:
First time I met her Tony Newton, our ex-MP, was walking through a local fete and I thought 'what's he doing with that attractive Asian girl?'Leon said:Omnium said:
Mostly I agree with you RT. I really like Patel though. Easily, in my view, the best plausible PM after Boris. I don't often find myself so far out on the wings.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure hate but certainly dislike intensely and, to some extent, fear.Omnium said:
Why is she so hated? I think she's really very good. Obviously has faults too.TheScreamingEagles said:I wonder why this has leaked today. Priti on manoeuvres?
The BBC reporting that last year No.10 overruled the Home Secretary to keep the Met Commissioner in her job. One for historians of Johnson's fall to ponder.
https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1488870878943354881
She is rabidly authoritarian yet pretends she is not. She appears to be, quite literally, an old fashioned hang-em and flog-em type of Home Secretary. Okay to be fair I have never heard her mention flogging but she has in the past being strongly in favour of the death penalty and I think her fundamental view is still in favour even if she cannot admit that publicly. There is no subtlety about her and the only language she seems to understand in terms of her job is that of threat and force.
I will be very glad when she is away from the Home Office.
You’re not alone. I like her and admire her. I also - God help me - slightly fancy her
Quite a few years ago now, of course.
Quite broad in the beam, but one can, er, overlook that
Whatever it is she doesn't deserve the unpopularity.
And she annoys righties because she's done a very poor job with migrant border crossings.
While in her previous role, she travelled to Israel, had a bunch of work meetings. Then lied about it to the Prime Minister. Was forgiven. More revelations came out. She then lied again. And after being lied to a second time, the Prime Minister was less forgiving.
She has a great personal backstory, is attractive and articulate. She's clearly not stupid.
But I'm not convinced she would be a great PM.
It makes liberals get shingles in horror
I don't like her because of her politics and she has been caught out telling whoppers a couple of times in the same way our glorious leader has. I don't care two hoots if she is black, white or blue (well I might be a little intrigued if she were blue)2 -
Not so exotic, but flying into Alderney on a stormy day can be ‘fun’!Foxy said:
I flew from St Thomas to Puerto Rico in the late Seventies with this eccentric airline:Leon said:
A fair point. A great airline route is actually better than high speed rail. I was wrongFoxy said:
I have had some great airline routes with window seats.Leon said:Polruan said:
Yes, Dawlish - between Exeter and Newton Abbot, and almost exactly halfway between London and Penzance (in terms of time rather than distance). I'd add the Tamar crossing into Cornwall and the next couple of miles around the estuaries; and the last stretch past the Hayle estuary before crossing from north coast to south and coasting along Marazion marsh and round Mounts Bay into Penzance. Even after doing the journey weekly for a couple of years I still stop and watch those views each time.Farooq said:Train porn. Since the Highlands is already taken, a shout out to these two sections:
Between Ludlow and Church Stretton, and
the Devon? Cornwall? section on the coast? Dawlish Warren perhaps.
Abroad: Swiss/Austrian border. At dawn.
The St Ives branch line is pretty stunning too.
And nice and slow
Everyone wants high-speed rail but there is a loss which comes with it, or so I have noted. Above a certain speed the countryside blurs - as you pass it too quickly - so you get no sense of the journey. It is just a whizzing mess of green or grey
I did Paris to Nantes a few years ago, all along the Loire, and I am sure in olden days it would have been stunning, but on the TGV I might as well have been on a plane. There is no point in looking out of the window as everything just whooshes past
Is there a single High-Speed Train on the great railway journeys list?I doubt it. Just as there isn’t a list of “great airline routes”
From Schipol to Cape Town in daytime on a cloudless day was glorious. The coasts, the mountains, the deserts, the forests, the mouth of the Congo. Who needs an in-flight movie?
Flying into Phoenix from the UK too. The snow, lakes, forests and mountains of Canada well worth a look.
flying across the Alps in clear weather is always fun. I also remember a flight across the Greenland Ice Cap from Iceland to ilullisat. OMG!
And seaplanes, I do love a seaplane. Sydney to Pittwater. Colombo to the Sri Lankan highlands. Anywhere in the Maldives to anywhere else. Seaplanes are brilliant
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilles_Air_Boats
The pilot was the only crew, and the co-pilot seat had the instruments removed to turn it into another passenger seat. Alas, my brother got that one. After taxiing down the ramp into the water the pilot had to handcraft up the wheels before taking off from the harbour.
The whole airline was a bit heath Robinson, and unfortunately the founder died in one of the planes shortly after, but a great experience while it lasted.0 -
Others have talked about the smirking thing from Patel, and that it comes up so often I think shows it isn't entirely about her policy positions because it is such a petty thing which people raise.2
-
The banks aren't candidates for PM. Sunak is.eek said:
A lot of that is the fault of the banks who processed the loans and did no work at all to check who got what. 1 obvious starting point that could be done is refusing to refund loans made to companies that were created after Covid appearedalgarkirk said:
Sunak has three big obstacles:Scott_xP said:Did Rishi Sunak blow his chance at toppling Boris Johnson last week? That’s what some Tory MPs think. “We were waiting for the signal but it never came”.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/levelling-up-white-paper-blackpool-michael-gove-rishi-sunak-b980179.html
Maxed out on tax, spend, debt and deficit
Stayed in cabinet when everyone else knew the government and leader was in the wrong and that the only moral course was to say so and resign (was the Savile slur the last new excuse giving clear grounds to do this?)
The billions of payments to fraudulent bogus companies which a nine year old would have spotted coming down the tracks
This is another example of where the blame lies 100% with the bank giving the same director multiple loans
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59761294
Government sets the rules for spending government money and is always accountable.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
0
This discussion has been closed.