. A Starmer FPN and he goes. Replace with Andy Burnham
Under NO circumstances:
He failed massively to win last time. Why? Because he is no bloody good.
He's not even an MP. Duh.
He will put off all the new Labour voters down sarf. And we still need them.
He has a penis.
So in the words of Maggie, 'No. No. No.'
What the fuck difference does it make that "he has a penis"? Are you high?
Says a man. And a tory man at that.
It makes 'the fuck difference' because Labour MUST choose a woman as next leader.
End of.
And I'm a Labour supporter. You're not. So piss off.
xx
Given that your party can't define what a woman is it's all a bit academic isn't it?
Non sequitur.
We need our next leader to be a woman. Whether that's someone who is a trans woman is another issue but I doubt the red wall thickos like Fucker Faroq would cope with it.
Next Labour leader must be a woman. End of.
Farooq is a liberal so he won't be fussed either way.
I was kinda joking but if LP future leader is a trans woman will they say that the party has now had a woman leader???
Since everyone is defining my opinions, I might chip in with my own thoughts. Yes, I am a liberal (but not a Liberal). That puts me in a position I'm quite happy with, in that I can float across different parties depending on circumstance. I've voted Lib Dem, Conservative, Green, and, fairly recently, SNP. I'm not averse to voting Labour but I haven't yet. It might happen depending on what's on offer. As for the Labour leadership and gender representation, I'm in favour of reasonable measures that increase the participation of women in industries where they have been underrepresented but I'm not sure I would go as far as to say that specific, individual jobs should be restricted by gender. So, for example, tax breaks for companies that help move the needle towards something fairer might be a good thing. But saying that no man may apply for the leadership of a particular party sounds wrong wrong wrong. As heavy-handed as I am when it comes to political arguments, I think party rules and legislation need to be more encouraging rather than draconian. We should collectively motivate women to stand and clear up the misogyny that negatively impacts their desire to do politics, not just rule out men. A race to the top instead of a race to the bottom.
Talking about floating positions: I'm a LibDem these days and quite happy about it. That doesn't mean I have to agree with the party on every issue! And at the GE I will vote for the SNP to remove David Duguid. I thought that was incompatible with being a LD member but was assured it was ok by ACH so here I am...
That makes me wonder if Alex Cole-Hamilton has bothered reading his own party rules book.
Which is why I resigned my membership. But if the leader tells me it's fine then it's fine. So back I came.
The invisible man is seen and heard more than ACH.
I don't know if it has been posted down thread but rumours that Russia has lost control of (abandoned?) Snake Island. Whether Ukraine has got it is another matter.
On a related point I did ask the question yesterday as to whether we can do something about the blockade on Odessa? It's not just an economic disaster for Ukraine but a potential food crisis for the world. What would be the problem with Nato ships escorting commercial vessels out of the area?
The Odessa approaches would have to be demined and I don't see a stampede of NATO navies volunteering for that operation.
Also, nobody will do blockade running if the USN won't and they look supremely disinterested with the nearest ship being USNS Trenton at Souda Bay.
The new anti-ship weapons that are on the way to Ukraine, would they be good enough to cover out to the 12-mile limit, at which point an international escort (perhaps from Turkey) could take over?
I don't know if it has been posted down thread but rumours that Russia has lost control of (abandoned?) Snake Island. Whether Ukraine has got it is another matter.
On a related point I did ask the question yesterday as to whether we can do something about the blockade on Odessa? It's not just an economic disaster for Ukraine but a potential food crisis for the world. What would be the problem with Nato ships escorting commercial vessels out of the area?
The Odessa approaches would have to be demined and I don't see a stampede of NATO navies volunteering for that operation.
Also, nobody will do blockade running if the USN won't and they look supremely disinterested with the nearest ship being USNS Trenton at Souda Bay.
I thought Turkey had closed the Black Sea for warships entering?
Is it possible Starmer went back to work and some other people didn’t .
In which case what happens then .
I don't think that's relevant. AFAIK Durham Police have to determine two things: was the event illegal and did Starmer participate? This clearly was a work event and the schedule leaked by the Mail yesterday actually corroborates that. It would be illegal if there was a significant degree of apparently unscheduled socialisation. The case for an event that was actually promoted as "Birthday Party!" seems easier to make.
We don't know what evidence Durham Police are looking at, nor how they are going to call it. Going on what's known in the public domain it doesn't look particularly obvious to me, but I take a fairly relaxed view on all of these events/parties.
There is a potential hypocrisy argument to make against Starmer but (a) hypocrisy isn't illegal; (b) while Johnson refuses to resign over his actual FPN(s) it doesn't really land on Starmer. It would be different if Starmer is served with an FPN and also refuses to resign. I don't think that will happen because I think it more likely he won't get an FPN and he will resign anyway if he does.
The issue, as I see it, isn't whether it was "a work event" but whether it was "reasonably necessary for work".
We know that there were other sources of food available, so the teams could have returned to their hotels and eaten separately.
For it to be "reasonably necessary" in my view then they would have needed to return to work after dinner - i.e. was a break from work vs. something that was tagged on at the end of the work day to say thank you to the troops.
Indeed. Again with the caveat Durham Police will make the call not us, I don't think it matters that alternative food supplies were available, as long as you can make a semi-convincing argument that it was a working dinner, which may be implied by yesterday's leaked schedule
I disagree - the alternative suppliers are important.
If they did not exist then it is automatically "reasonably necessary" to have the food independent of whether there was any work afterwards.
If they do exist then it is not proof that there was an event, but it does require proof that work continued during/afterwards. I don't think you can rely on the schedule to proof it was "reasonably necessary".
With the caveat that this is all bollocks, the police shouldn't be getting involved in either the Downing Street or the Durham events and it's all about the politics.
If takeaway was available then they could have eaten in their hotel rooms, in which case I can't see how it was reasonably necessary to eat together.
55% want referendum within 5 years, and the actual yes: no is 49/51 - a dead heat at present within MOE.
People voted for a referendum. In a democracy we should give people what they vote for. But in this campaign we need to set out the framework for how such votes take place as we can't just repeat them every electoral cycle.
Or have a 60% threshold so we don't have a "only get lucky once" bias.
Yes lets do a rigged referendum, those thick Scots will not notice. They need kept in their place.
55% want referendum within 5 years, and the actual yes: no is 49/51 - a dead heat at present within MOE.
People voted for a referendum. In a democracy we should give people what they vote for. But in this campaign we need to set out the framework for how such votes take place as we can't just repeat them every electoral cycle.
Or have a 60% threshold so we don't have a "only get lucky once" bias.
Yes lets do a rigged referendum, those thick Scots will not notice. They need kept in their place.
I think that should've happened for Brexit too.
I don't think huge constitutional issues should be sensitive to short-run political climate.
I don't know if it has been posted down thread but rumours that Russia has lost control of (abandoned?) Snake Island. Whether Ukraine has got it is another matter.
On a related point I did ask the question yesterday as to whether we can do something about the blockade on Odessa? It's not just an economic disaster for Ukraine but a potential food crisis for the world. What would be the problem with Nato ships escorting commercial vessels out of the area?
Looking at the videos the Ukranians certainly gave it a pasting and sunk several ships as well.
There were some videos of Ukrainian plane strikes on the island that came out last night/this morning. Then one of a helicopter getting hit. Scuttlebutt is that the helicopter contained Russian special forces who were sent in to help extract survivors.
Although I'm unsure why they'd send in sf to rescue people from an island where there are no enemy troops.
the ships included a landing craft , and TB types , so they likely had troops on the island , it also showed armed men about the buildings as they got hit by drones.
World This Weekend just devoted the full half hour to Northern Ireland. Which was simultaneously both refreshing and thoroughly depressing.
And? Do they have any idea what is happening next? My guess is that the DUP will take their ball away and stop Stormount from sitting. Which is indeed depressing.
From what Edwin Poots was saying, they are threatening a total non co-operation with any of the terms of the GFA. Basically, they want the protocol binned and a series of re-runs of elections till they rightfully win. Meanwhile. The Health Service, in particular, is in the toilet and no decisions on that, or much else can be made. The Alliance want the GFA re-negotiated too.
The GFA or the protocol? One of the major defects of the GFA, in my view, was that it embedded the religious divide in NI and made that the central feature of NI politics not just for then but forever. The Alliance want done with that and they are right. If NI is to move on religion must return to being a private matter.
Doxxing is not fine. So we should stop it. Calling someone "a twat" IS fine, clearly, otherwise 90% of my commentary is forbidden
As for @Heathener I agree with @NickPalmer. I used to think she was a troll, but I don't any more. If she is a Russian troll, she's not very good, she barely mentions anything-to-do-with Russia from one week to the next. She seems to be what she says she is, an opinionated Labour supporting woman with a fondness for Buddhism, she might be eccentric, but we are all eccentric - we're on here, for a start
Peace!
Technical question, if someone has used a series of made up usernames previously, can referring to them truly be said to be doxxing? Not that I’m suggesting that you’re an expert or anything.
Normally, no. But if one of the the previous usernames points to a meatspace identity, then yes.
what is a meatspace
Pretentious term for "real life"
you learn something every day, thanks. @StillWaters
I don't know if it has been posted down thread but rumours that Russia has lost control of (abandoned?) Snake Island. Whether Ukraine has got it is another matter.
On a related point I did ask the question yesterday as to whether we can do something about the blockade on Odessa? It's not just an economic disaster for Ukraine but a potential food crisis for the world. What would be the problem with Nato ships escorting commercial vessels out of the area?
Looking at the videos the Ukranians certainly gave it a pasting and sunk several ships as well.
There were some videos of Ukrainian plane strikes on the island that came out last night/this morning. Then one of a helicopter getting hit. Scuttlebutt is that the helicopter contained Russian special forces who were sent in to help extract survivors.
Although I'm unsure why they'd send in sf to rescue people from an island where there are no enemy troops.
the ships included a landing craft , and TB types , so they likely had troops on the island , it also showed armed men about the buildings as they got hit by drones.
Sorry, what I meant was why the Russians would need to send SF to a place where there were no enemy (i.e. Ukrainian) troops.
I wouldn't like to be on that island, especially if they've lost their fresh water supply...
Is it possible Starmer went back to work and some other people didn’t .
In which case what happens then .
I don't think that's relevant. AFAIK Durham Police have to determine two things: was the event illegal and did Starmer participate? This clearly was a work event and the schedule leaked by the Mail yesterday actually corroborates that. It would be illegal if there was a significant degree of apparently unscheduled socialisation. The case for an event that was actually promoted as "Birthday Party!" seems easier to make.
We don't know what evidence Durham Police are looking at, nor how they are going to call it. Going on what's known in the public domain it doesn't look particularly obvious to me, but I take a fairly relaxed view on all of these events/parties.
There is a potential hypocrisy argument to make against Starmer but (a) hypocrisy isn't illegal; (b) while Johnson refuses to resign over his actual FPN(s) it doesn't really land on Starmer. It would be different if Starmer is served with an FPN and also refuses to resign. I don't think that will happen because I think it more likely he won't get an FPN and he will resign anyway if he does.
The issue, as I see it, isn't whether it was "a work event" but whether it was "reasonably necessary for work".
We know that there were other sources of food available, so the teams could have returned to their hotels and eaten separately.
For it to be "reasonably necessary" in my view then they would have needed to return to work after dinner - i.e. was a break from work vs. something that was tagged on at the end of the work day to say thank you to the troops.
Indeed. Again with the caveat Durham Police will make the call not us, I don't think it matters that alternative food supplies were available, as long as you can make a semi-convincing argument that it was a working dinner, which may be implied by yesterday's leaked schedule
I disagree - the alternative suppliers are important.
If they did not exist then it is automatically "reasonably necessary" to have the food independent of whether there was any work afterwards.
If they do exist then it is not proof that there was an event, but it does require proof that work continued during/afterwards. I don't think you can rely on the schedule to proof it was "reasonably necessary".
With the caveat that this is all bollocks, the police shouldn't be getting involved in either the Downing Street or the Durham events and it's all about the politics.
If takeaway was available then they could have eaten in their hotel rooms, in which case I can't see how it was reasonably necessary to eat together.
what part of "they were working" do you not understand. Have you never had a working dinner?
Comments
NEW THREAD
I don't think huge constitutional issues should be sensitive to short-run political climate.
I wouldn't like to be on that island, especially if they've lost their fresh water supply...
Betting PostF1: after some agonising, backed Bottas to win group 1 (other drivers are all British) at 3.3.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2022/05/miami-pre-race-2022.html