Why the local elections could bring some temporary respite to Sunak – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
"unfair to Truss" shouldn't exist as a phrase. The MoD should use even the slightest, ghastliest, whiff of her as a test for everything they have in their arsenal.StillWaters said:FPT
I actually think that’s unfair to Truss.Mexicanpete said:...
The whole thing is a craven abdication of moral duty, and your girl after ten minutes as PM installed a hatful of no mark donor's to the HoL and Johnson before her rammed it full of starlets and the starstruck (for Johnson).Luckyguy1983 said:The problem with the Lords isn't the hereditaries, it's the assorted lumpen social democratic lobby fodder appointed by successive Governments cluttering up the joint.
You may not like their politics, but Elliott (led the Brexit campaign) and Moynihan (entrepreneur who built up PA Consulting) are definitely not “no mark donors”
Porter is a classical SPAD appointment so a bit meh.
0 -
Perhaps that should be Rishi's template. Forget the high-tech digital stuff, pretend all that hasn't even been invented, and get out there, just him, a megaphone and an upturned box, one man taking his message in the raw* to every town and village square in England, asking people for their trust, their support, their vote.Stuartinromford said:
John Major's 1992 score of 14.1 million votes still hasn't been beaten.No_Offence_Alan said:
And the population and therefore the electorate grow over time, significantly so after 25 years or more..bigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment
* by which I mean appearing unfiltered and authentic rather than with no clothes on.0 -
The probability of same name / same DOB is unchanged though?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is quite useful when you have a 29th February date as I do as there are very much fewer patients on NHS records born on the 29th FebruaryDecrepiterJohnL said:
My NHS experience of the past couple of years is of always being asked for my date of birth first, which presumably then pops up candidate names on the NHS computer, then name, and finally partial address. (Sometimes it worries me that people nearby can hear all this but I suppose it is better than having the wrong leg lopped off.)SeaShantyIrish2 said:
A few years ago, yours truly went to my local health provider for some blood work ordered by my doctor.Flatlander said:
I think I'd make a bit of a fuss about that.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
Not because it had caused harm or to be awkward but because it must be a risk for future patients and should be fixed.
The chances of anyone actually listening or changing their broken process must be pretty low though (one of the many problem with the NHS).
The procedure at the lab, was for staff to ask patients NOT just about their names BUT also for their date of birth.
Turned out that another guy also at the lab for tests, also had my same first and last name; but different DOB.
Thankfully they checked BOTH names AND birth dates.0 -
No surprise and that despite the English nicking most of our moneyJim_Miller said:FPT: For Topping (and others), the findings in this book:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Millionaire_Next_Door
"Most of the millionaire households that they profiled did not have the extravagant lifestyles that most people would assume. This finding is backed up by surveys indicating how little these millionaire households have spent on such things as cars, watches, clothing, and other luxury products/services. Most importantly, the book gives a list of reasons for why these people managed to accumulate so much wealth (the top one being that "They live below their means")."
(One finding that may amuse some of you: Scots families in the US were, at the time of the study, about twice as likely to be millionaires as English families.)1 -
Explains why you're still so well-preserved, after celebrating your 20th-something birthday?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is quite useful when you have a 29th February date as I do as there are very much fewer patients on NHS records born on the 29th FebruaryDecrepiterJohnL said:
My NHS experience of the past couple of years is of always being asked for my date of birth first, which presumably then pops up candidate names on the NHS computer, then name, and finally partial address. (Sometimes it worries me that people nearby can hear all this but I suppose it is better than having the wrong leg lopped off.)SeaShantyIrish2 said:
A few years ago, yours truly went to my local health provider for some blood work ordered by my doctor.Flatlander said:
I think I'd make a bit of a fuss about that.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
Not because it had caused harm or to be awkward but because it must be a risk for future patients and should be fixed.
The chances of anyone actually listening or changing their broken process must be pretty low though (one of the many problem with the NHS).
The procedure at the lab, was for staff to ask patients NOT just about their names BUT also for their date of birth.
Turned out that another guy also at the lab for tests, also had my same first and last name; but different DOB.
Thankfully they checked BOTH names AND birth dates.1 -
Yes, would annoy me too. Although I’ve a cousin who was christened Matthew and has been known as Matt since childhood.mwadams said:
I *used* to get `Adam Matthews` as a result of family name/given name box transposition when transcribing a paper form to computers. Since everything has long since been computers-first-and-only, that has dropped to `almost never`.OldKingCole said:
My real first name is extremely unusual, although my second isn’t. Doing some genealogical research I found someone with the exact same name. Dead now, I’m sure.Flatlander said:
Name and DOB are better but might not be sufficient.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
A few years ago, yours truly went to my local health provider for some blood work ordered by my doctor.Flatlander said:
I think I'd make a bit of a fuss about that.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
Not because it had caused harm or to be awkward but because it must be a risk for future patients and should be fixed.
The chances of anyone actually listening or changing their broken process must be pretty low though (one of the many problem with the NHS).
The procedure at the lab, was for staff to ask patients NOT just about their names BUT also for their date of birth.
Turned out that another guy also at the lab for tests, also had my same first and last name; but different DOB.
Thankfully they checked BOTH names AND birth dates.
Admittedly it is a low probability event to have 'twins' in the same hospital but as Mrs Flatlander will tell you (a saga with HMRC which I recounted on here a while back) there is still a non-zero chance of confusion.
I thought this was what patient wrist bands were for?
Quite often get my names reversed in hospital. I understand, and don’t get cross, until the ‘offending’ member of staff argues with me.
ETA: I still call in a hit squad every time anyone calls me "Matt" though.
His brother was Richard and no-one to my knowledge ever called him Dick.0 -
Could be! No, I think Islam encourages charitable donations (cf church tithes) and Ramadan reminds Muslims of their obligations on that front although in theory it is a year-round thing. For the same reason there is also an increased number of appeals by Muslim charities.dixiedean said:
Presumably because the regular volunteer who empties them is away?DecrepiterJohnL said:OT shopping sitrep. No Covid masks. The many foodbank donation bins were full to overflowing, presumably due to Ramadan with help from Easter and Passover.
1 -
Yes, you don't get rich spending money!Jim_Miller said:FPT: For Topping (and others), the findings in this book:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Millionaire_Next_Door
"Most of the millionaire households that they profiled did not have the extravagant lifestyles that most people would assume. This finding is backed up by surveys indicating how little these millionaire households have spent on such things as cars, watches, clothing, and other luxury products/services. Most importantly, the book gives a list of reasons for why these people managed to accumulate so much wealth (the top one being that "They live below their means")."
(One finding that may amuse some of you: Scots families in the US were, at the time of the study, about twice as likely to be millionaires as English families.)0 -
I was interested to see that measures against damage from heading are 'woke'. Makes sense. Their opponents will very much be unwoke in the long run.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Good eveningHeathener said:O/t football is heading for a big problem.
This isn’t about something woke (as if I’d mind that). It’s a serious issue.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68713327
Raphael Varane: Man Utd and France defender says heading has 'damaged his body’
There is a lot of evidence the damage heading does to a footballer especially in later life
I was playing a football match in Edinburgh in 1962 when I was elbowed in the back of the neck
Apparently I played for another 10 minutes before collapsing on the field and an ambulance was called. In the ambulance I said to my now wife you are wearing an engagement ring and who are you engaged to, before collapsing back into unconsciousness
I woke about 3.00am in the trauma ward of Edinburgh Royal Infirmary being violently sick and had no idea what had happened
It took over 6 months to recall going out to the match and playing, and even today I cannot recall everything about that evening
I didn't play football again and this is one isolated incident
The time may come when heading is outlawed but the game would not be recognisable1 -
Zakat isn’t it?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Could be! No, I think Islam encourages charitable donations (cf church tithes) and Ramadan reminds Muslims of their obligations on that front although in theory it is a year-round thing. For the same reason there is also an increased number of appeals by Muslim charities.dixiedean said:
Presumably because the regular volunteer who empties them is away?DecrepiterJohnL said:OT shopping sitrep. No Covid masks. The many foodbank donation bins were full to overflowing, presumably due to Ramadan with help from Easter and Passover.
2 -
Yes, I know a guy who clashed heads with another fielder during a cricket match. He continued fielding until the end of the match, but had no recollection of anything except gazing up at the moon in the pub garden afterwards. At some point after that he collapsed and was carted off in an ambulance.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Good eveningHeathener said:O/t football is heading for a big problem.
This isn’t about something woke (as if I’d mind that). It’s a serious issue.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68713327
Raphael Varane: Man Utd and France defender says heading has 'damaged his body’
There is a lot of evidence the damage heading does to a footballer especially in later life
I was playing a football match in Edinburgh in 1962 when I was elbowed in the back of the neck
Apparently I played for another 10 minutes before collapsing on the field and an ambulance was called. In the ambulance I said to my now wife you are wearing an engagement ring and who are you engaged to, before collapsing back into unconsciousness
I woke about 3.00am in the trauma ward of Edinburgh Royal Infirmary being violently sick and had no idea what had happened
It took over 6 months to recall going out to the match and playing, and even today I cannot recall everything about that evening
I didn't play football again and this is one isolated incident
The time may come when heading is outlawed but the game would not be recognisable1 -
Scottish government minister said it most definitely was in the remit , that is the reason d'etre of the halfwits and their weirdo green buddies.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Point of JKR exercise was NOT search for Truth (legal or otherwise3) but rather pursuit of ideology.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
Mission accomplished.0 -
Same name and same date of birth is unchanged (and tiny, which is why that combination is used), same name and same birthday is a quarter of the chance when the birthday is 29th Feb though (leaving aside small season variations in birthdays).Flatlander said:
The probability of same name / same DOB is unchanged though?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is quite useful when you have a 29th February date as I do as there are very much fewer patients on NHS records born on the 29th FebruaryDecrepiterJohnL said:
My NHS experience of the past couple of years is of always being asked for my date of birth first, which presumably then pops up candidate names on the NHS computer, then name, and finally partial address. (Sometimes it worries me that people nearby can hear all this but I suppose it is better than having the wrong leg lopped off.)SeaShantyIrish2 said:
A few years ago, yours truly went to my local health provider for some blood work ordered by my doctor.Flatlander said:
I think I'd make a bit of a fuss about that.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
Not because it had caused harm or to be awkward but because it must be a risk for future patients and should be fixed.
The chances of anyone actually listening or changing their broken process must be pretty low though (one of the many problem with the NHS).
The procedure at the lab, was for staff to ask patients NOT just about their names BUT also for their date of birth.
Turned out that another guy also at the lab for tests, also had my same first and last name; but different DOB.
Thankfully they checked BOTH names AND birth dates.0 -
Well preserved only by my recent pacemaker, otherwise according to my consultant the 2019 GE may have been my last GESeaShantyIrish2 said:
Explains why you're still so well-preserved, after celebrating your 20th-something birthday?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is quite useful when you have a 29th February date as I do as there are very much fewer patients on NHS records born on the 29th FebruaryDecrepiterJohnL said:
My NHS experience of the past couple of years is of always being asked for my date of birth first, which presumably then pops up candidate names on the NHS computer, then name, and finally partial address. (Sometimes it worries me that people nearby can hear all this but I suppose it is better than having the wrong leg lopped off.)SeaShantyIrish2 said:
A few years ago, yours truly went to my local health provider for some blood work ordered by my doctor.Flatlander said:
I think I'd make a bit of a fuss about that.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
Not because it had caused harm or to be awkward but because it must be a risk for future patients and should be fixed.
The chances of anyone actually listening or changing their broken process must be pretty low though (one of the many problem with the NHS).
The procedure at the lab, was for staff to ask patients NOT just about their names BUT also for their date of birth.
Turned out that another guy also at the lab for tests, also had my same first and last name; but different DOB.
Thankfully they checked BOTH names AND birth dates.0 -
I can atest to thatFoxy said:
Yes, you don't get rich spending money!Jim_Miller said:FPT: For Topping (and others), the findings in this book:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Millionaire_Next_Door
"Most of the millionaire households that they profiled did not have the extravagant lifestyles that most people would assume. This finding is backed up by surveys indicating how little these millionaire households have spent on such things as cars, watches, clothing, and other luxury products/services. Most importantly, the book gives a list of reasons for why these people managed to accumulate so much wealth (the top one being that "They live below their means")."
(One finding that may amuse some of you: Scots families in the US were, at the time of the study, about twice as likely to be millionaires as English families.)0 -
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken0 -
It is not unfair a) on morality grounds because she had only been PM for 49 days or 5 minutes, take your pick and b) they were partisan political appointees irrespective of their back story.StillWaters said:FPT
I actually think that’s unfair to Truss.Mexicanpete said:...
The whole thing is a craven abdication of moral duty, and your girl after ten minutes as PM installed a hatful of no mark donor's to the HoL and Johnson before her rammed it full of starlets and the starstruck (for Johnson).Luckyguy1983 said:The problem with the Lords isn't the hereditaries, it's the assorted lumpen social democratic lobby fodder appointed by successive Governments cluttering up the joint.
You may not like their politics, but Elliott (led the Brexit campaign) and Moynihan (entrepreneur who built up PA Consulting) are definitely not “no mark donors”
Porter is a classical SPAD appointment so a bit meh.0 -
For all you AI fan-boys/bots out there in PB land . . .
Courthouse News Service - California authors can’t intervene in ChatGPT copyright cases pending in New York
A Manhattan judge refused to allow intervenors to possibly disrupt the expedited timeline of four consolidated copyright cases against ChatGPT-maker OpenAI pending in New York federal court.
https://www.courthousenews.com/california-authors-cant-intervene-in-chatgpt-copyright-cases-pending-in-new-york/0 -
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken0 -
Already got a pacemaker in your early 20s? You must REALLY be a party-hearty kind of guy!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Well preserved only by my recent pacemaker, otherwise according to my consultant the 2019 GE may have been my last GESeaShantyIrish2 said:
Explains why you're still so well-preserved, after celebrating your 20th-something birthday?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is quite useful when you have a 29th February date as I do as there are very much fewer patients on NHS records born on the 29th FebruaryDecrepiterJohnL said:
My NHS experience of the past couple of years is of always being asked for my date of birth first, which presumably then pops up candidate names on the NHS computer, then name, and finally partial address. (Sometimes it worries me that people nearby can hear all this but I suppose it is better than having the wrong leg lopped off.)SeaShantyIrish2 said:
A few years ago, yours truly went to my local health provider for some blood work ordered by my doctor.Flatlander said:
I think I'd make a bit of a fuss about that.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
Not because it had caused harm or to be awkward but because it must be a risk for future patients and should be fixed.
The chances of anyone actually listening or changing their broken process must be pretty low though (one of the many problem with the NHS).
The procedure at the lab, was for staff to ask patients NOT just about their names BUT also for their date of birth.
Turned out that another guy also at the lab for tests, also had my same first and last name; but different DOB.
Thankfully they checked BOTH names AND birth dates.1 -
Also I don't think there was much chance of me losing a leg as I was conscious during the op. I think I might have noticed.1
-
Luntz is back on board the MAGA train, if this nonsense is anuything to go by.
https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1775112480311689417
It's his first Wisconsin appearance in 2 years, so why is Joe Biden going to predominantly white Green Bay rather than more racially diverse Milwaukee or college town Madison?
...Community note.
"Biden visited Milwaukee in March 2024. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/03/13/takeaways-from-president-joe-bidens-trip-to-milwaukee/72950737007/
The article Luntz links to says Trump is the one visiting Green Bay, while Biden is in fact going to Madison. "1 -
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.0 -
How anyone can oppose Labour's sensible remove hereditary peers stuff is beyond me. These people are there literally through no talent or skill, just where they were born. It is batty1
-
You would be surprised!kjh said:Also I don't think there was much chance of me losing a leg as I was conscious during the op. I think I might have noticed.
Someone removed a mole from the wrong patient in my Trust a few years back under LA. He had answered to the wrong name.
This is why we are pedantic about WHO checklists. Usually when these errors happen it's because someone hasn't done the checks properly.
2 -
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.1 -
If even Scottish Tories are saying what you are saying up front ...Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.0 -
You do know that the population of England increased somewhat between 1997 and 2017, right?bigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment
And you do know, that it is not only people in England that get a vote?
And you do know that under the FPTP system, if you motivate people to vote against you, then then raw vote totals can be... misleading... as regards electoral outcomes?
I just want to check you are aware of those things.0 -
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.0 -
Some have talent and skill. Ian Botham was a fine cricketer.BatteryCorrectHorse said:How anyone can oppose Labour's sensible remove hereditary peers stuff is beyond me. These people are there literally through no talent or skill, just where they were born. It is batty
As a Lord in the legislature, however, he is utterly preposterous.1 -
This modern phenomenon is as a result of a sequence of well intentioned, generally good actions.Andy_JS said:Anecdote: until this year I'd never seen anyone fare dodging when getting on the London Underground, even though I use it fairly often. So far this year I've seen it happen quite a few times, right in front of staff at the gates. People brazenly pushing their way through the barriers, seemingly safe in the knowledge that no-one will do anything about it.
1) in times past, ticket collectors, guards etc, would physically tackle fare dodgers
2) this is now banned - physical risk to staff, legal liability for companies.
3) this is good - less injured employees, less injury (and worse) due to amateur attempts at restraining people etc.
4) at this point someone raises “The Police” as a solution. The police were never present in enough numbers to actually tackle shop lifting or fare dodging. Their job was to turn up half an hour later to collect the miscreants from the hero employees.
See the push to decriminalise shop lifting.
No, manned tills dont anything - talk to the staff on high street shops who tell if thefts in front of them, with the shop lifters *trying* to cause physical contact. So they can claim assault.
The future? Well, the local Tesco franchise has a “cousin” of the manager who isn’t employed by the store (no sir) who tackles shop lifters and goes to magistrates court moderately regularly for assault.
Other, higher tech stores are looking at gated entry, linked to video ID’ing of wrong uns. Look out for the Guardian articles about the poor being locked out of stores.
2 -
With respect to the Great Trans Debate, a PBer (forget who) opined recently, that unlike in UK, in US the trans issue was "subsumed" (think that was the term) into/by the debate over abortion in wake of repeal of Roe v Wade.
Which is NOT really correct, at least IMHO.
For example, the recent MAGA-manufactured flap over coincidence of Easter (a notoriously "movable feast") being same day as Transgender Visibility Day.
Which as far as I can tell, had ZERO to do with the pro-life versus pro-choice controversy.
Personally think that GOPer politicos and their mouthpieces are banging the anti-trans drum so loudly, is because of its appeal to voters BEYOND the core pro-life constituency.
That is, to folks who are either pro-choice or ambivalent on abortion, BUT who (for whatever reason) are opposed to and/or repulsed by gender-bending.
Note that there was similar dynamic a generation ago, when GOP campaigned with vigor against gays and lesbians. For example, with TV campaign ads featuring the alleged debauchery of San Francisco Gay Pride parades.
So GOP nutbags still making a meal of the homophobia, but beyond this, the MAGA-GOP has switched to anti-trans, as having broader (ahem) appeal.0 -
It is so wonderful to be on the 7th year of a Corbyn Government, at least I assume that is the reality @bigjohnowls inhabits.0
-
I'm surprised you've not seen it until recently, I've seen it many times going back decades; perhaps I frequent ropier parts of town than you do! When I was a kid in Newcastle in the 80s I remember people jumping the Metro barriers all the time. I'm not sure if I've seen fare dodging more often recently. Maybe. I saw a young woman tailgating her pal through the barrier at Honor Oak the other day, they were both eating McDonald's which I thought was quite on brand.Andy_JS said:Anecdote: until this year I'd never seen anyone fare dodging when getting on the London Underground, even though I use it fairly often. So far this year I've seen it happen quite a few times, right in front of staff at the gates. People brazenly pushing their way through the barriers, seemingly safe in the knowledge that no-one will do anything about it.
0 -
So they're going to fine homeless people.
Do homeless people have a lot of money to pay fines?0 -
Just watched the Conservative PPB for LE2024
These local Candidates sound amazing.
Their track record sounds brilliant.
FFS who do they think we are?0 -
All true but not necessarily relevant. The fact is that for all his myriad flaws, Corbyn's Labour was quite attractive in 2017 and did remove the Conservatives' majority even though the government had a huge poll lead at the start of the campaign. CCHQ understood this which is why a lot of Boris's 2019 landslide borrowed heavily from Corbyn (and ironically Labour went back to the failed Miliband formula).rcs1000 said:
You do know that the population of England increased somewhat between 1997 and 2017, right?bigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment
And you do know, that it is not only people in England that get a vote?
And you do know that under the FPTP system, if you motivate people to vote against you, then then raw vote totals can be... misleading... as regards electoral outcomes?
I just want to check you are aware of those things.0 -
Issue for ordinary punters is police can decide not to take furthjer but add you to the HCR regsiter an dyou would not know anything about it and so could have issues later with all sorts of things given all public bodies , HR depts etc will have access to it.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.1 -
Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?0 -
The counterfactual is Corbyn immediately supports the May Government on Russia's poisoning and offers the 2017 manifesto again, do they do better?DecrepiterJohnL said:
All true but not necessarily relevant. The fact is that for all his myriad flaws, Corbyn's Labour was quite attractive in 2017 and did remove the Conservatives' majority even though the government had a huge poll lead at the start of the campaign. CCHQ understood this which is why a lot of Boris's 2019 landslide borrowed heavily from Corbyn (and ironically Labour went back to the failed Miliband formula).rcs1000 said:
You do know that the population of England increased somewhat between 1997 and 2017, right?bigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment
And you do know, that it is not only people in England that get a vote?
And you do know that under the FPTP system, if you motivate people to vote against you, then then raw vote totals can be... misleading... as regards electoral outcomes?
I just want to check you are aware of those things.
I would argue it was the unpopularity of Corbyn, not the popularity of the Tories, that produced the result. It is why a reversal was always underpriced and why I said at the time it was nonsensical that the Tories thought they'd solved elections when they won with the most unpopular leader they'd ever had.
Arguably if Labour had done my suggestion above and done Keir Starmer's Brexit policy from the day after 2017, they'd probably be in government now.1 -
Yes we have all out elections too. That includes council seats in new wards in areas that were up in bad years locally for the Tories, ie 2023 and 2022 as well as the better year of 2021.
That combined with fewer seats being up than last year and a reasonable performance by Susan Hall given current polls mean the local elections, although bad, won't be bad enough for Sunak to be removed by Tory MPs and he will survive until the general election as leader and PM0 -
I'd vote for you HYUFD!HYUFD said:Yes we have all out elections too. That includes council seats in new wards in areas that were up in bad years locally for the Tories, ie 2023 and 2022 as well as the better year of 2021.
That combined with fewer seats being up than last year and a reasonable performance by Susan Hall given current polls mean the local elections, although bad, won't be bad enough for Sunak to be removed by Tory MPs and he will survive until the general election as leader and PM1 -
Sadly not your backroom boys made sure that could not happen by diverting funds and efforts away from key marginals to safe Right Wing Labour ConstituenciesBatteryCorrectHorse said:It is so wonderful to be on the 7th year of a Corbyn Government, at least I assume that is the reality @bigjohnowls inhabits.
You should hang your head in shame that SKS types enabled 14 years of Tory misrule0 -
Nicky Morgan.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?0 -
I disagree: I think people voted for Corbyn safe in the knowledge he wouldn't win. Later, when people thought he *might* win, his vote share dropped markedly, and the Conservatives got a stonking majority.DecrepiterJohnL said:
All true but not necessarily relevant. The fact is that for all his myriad flaws, Corbyn's Labour was quite attractive in 2017 and did remove the Conservatives' majority even though the government had a huge poll lead at the start of the campaign. CCHQ understood this which is why a lot of Boris's 2019 landslide borrowed heavily from Corbyn (and ironically Labour went back to the failed Miliband formula).rcs1000 said:
You do know that the population of England increased somewhat between 1997 and 2017, right?bigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment
And you do know, that it is not only people in England that get a vote?
And you do know that under the FPTP system, if you motivate people to vote against you, then then raw vote totals can be... misleading... as regards electoral outcomes?
I just want to check you are aware of those things.0 -
Bob Spink? Castle Point’s MP once upon a timeBatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?0 -
12.3 million though voted even for May's Tories in England in 2017 and 12.7 million for Boris in 2019. In part to keep Corbyn outbigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment0 -
@bigjohnowls
I look forward you posting - and celebrating - the upcoming record performance of Starmer, when he registers more Labour votes in England than Corbyn achieved in 2017.0 -
No, you are wrong.BatteryCorrectHorse said:It is so wonderful to be on the 7th year of a Corbyn Government, at least I assume that is the reality @bigjohnowls inhabits.
The worst possible outcome would be for The Jessiah to actually reach No. 10
This would involve compromise, schism, the shattering of the True Faith. Reality.
The King Over The Water is always better than The King In The Royal Bath.0 -
Aid ships are turning back from Gaza with around 240 tons of undelivered aid after the killing of 7 World Central Kitchen aid workers.
Just in case anyone was wondering what could possibly be gained by the IDF bombing the World Central Kitchen aid convoy.
Genocide lovers please explain
0 -
Some data.rcs1000 said:
I disagree: I think people voted for Corbyn safe in the knowledge he wouldn't win. Later, when people thought he *might* win, his vote share dropped markedly, and the Conservatives got a stonking majority.DecrepiterJohnL said:
All true but not necessarily relevant. The fact is that for all his myriad flaws, Corbyn's Labour was quite attractive in 2017 and did remove the Conservatives' majority even though the government had a huge poll lead at the start of the campaign. CCHQ understood this which is why a lot of Boris's 2019 landslide borrowed heavily from Corbyn (and ironically Labour went back to the failed Miliband formula).rcs1000 said:
You do know that the population of England increased somewhat between 1997 and 2017, right?bigjohnowls said:
@DominoR87778
Number of people England who voted Labour at a GE
2017: Corbyn 11.4 mill
1997: Blair 11.3 mill
1992: Kinnock 9.6 mill
2019: Corbyn 9.2 mill
2001: Blair 9.1 mill
2015: Miliband 8.1 mill
2005: Blair 8.0 mill
2010: Brown 7.0 mill
Whilst against the whole establishment
And you do know, that it is not only people in England that get a vote?
And you do know that under the FPTP system, if you motivate people to vote against you, then then raw vote totals can be... misleading... as regards electoral outcomes?
I just want to check you are aware of those things.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/18588-why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener0 -
He kept plugging away though.Malmesbury said:
No, you are wrong.BatteryCorrectHorse said:It is so wonderful to be on the 7th year of a Corbyn Government, at least I assume that is the reality @bigjohnowls inhabits.
The worst possible outcome would be for The Jessiah to actually reach No. 10
This would involve compromise, schism, the shattering of the True Faith. Reality.
The King Over The Water is always better than The King In The Royal Bath.0 -
Ursula von der Leyen
@vonderleyen
·
7h
I pay homage to the @WCKitchen aid workers who lost their lives in Gaza.
Lost their lives when the Terrorist state we have funded for the last six months murdered them i presume she means0 -
Victoria Atkins at Health and Social care always looks very out her depth. Like a rabbit in the headlights every time.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
But perhaps the best example is Sunak himself.1 -
Ask Al de Pfeffel.Malmesbury said:
No, you are wrong.BatteryCorrectHorse said:It is so wonderful to be on the 7th year of a Corbyn Government, at least I assume that is the reality @bigjohnowls inhabits.
The worst possible outcome would be for The Jessiah to actually reach No. 10
This would involve compromise, schism, the shattering of the True Faith. Reality.
The King Over The Water is always better than The King In The Royal Bath.0 -
Rishi Sunak?ydoethur said:
Nicky Morgan.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?0 -
Liz Truss?Luckyguy1983 said:
Rishi Sunak?ydoethur said:
Nicky Morgan.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
Actually, lettuce not go there...2 -
Joe (lightweight) Swinsonydoethur said:
Nicky Morgan.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
& L4%K1 -
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.2 -
My nominee is I.T. Trebitsch-Lincoln.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?1 -
Have we done this?
Humza Yousaf has said it is "increasingly difficult" to shield his children from racism after he was targeted with Islamophobic graffiti near his Dundee home.
Racist slurs relating to the Scottish first minister's Pakistani heritage were sprayed on the walls and fences of homes in a street in Broughty Ferry, on Monday.
It is near to where the first minister lives with his wife and two children.
The graffiti, which has since been removed, happened on the day the Scottish government's controversial new hate crime laws came into force.
https://news.sky.com/story/first-minister-humza-yousaf-condemns-racist-graffiti-aimed-at-him-near-dundee-home-131064940 -
Jared O’Mara still takes some beating as the worst MP of the 21st century.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?3 -
The Marquess of Granby may feel slighted at being overlooked.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
My nominee is I.T. Trebitsch-Lincoln.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?0 -
Yep, could have gone a lot worse.kjh said:Sitting in hospital having just had my trigger finger op (very minor op). The notes they had for me were for someone else with the same name. Still got that sorted and they didn't amputate my leg by accident so all is well. Waiting to be discharged now.
0 -
Have to say I've lived in East London since 2005 and it's always been a thing at East Ham. The fare dodgers are often young men though of late I've seen older people, some of them I think working, going through in groups of three or four.Andy_JS said:Anecdote: until this year I'd never seen anyone fare dodging when getting on the London Underground, even though I use it fairly often. So far this year I've seen it happen quite a few times, right in front of staff at the gates. People brazenly pushing their way through the barriers, seemingly safe in the knowledge that no-one will do anything about it.
TfL estimate up to 15% of all journeys are made illegally at a cost of some £160 million to its coffers but as others have said, what can they do? When the revenue inspectors come to East Ham, they usually get a nice haul of offenders but it makes no long term difference. The big problem are the wide gates for luggage which allow groups to get through or tailgate but some just push the gates aside.
How much would it cost TfL to try to crack down on that last 15% of unpaid journeys? Probably about as much as the lost revenue so it gets tolerated.0 -
Plus (or minus for some) majority of comics taking the mickey out of the new law, will make it clear they are PRO-trans.viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.
NOT performing at the Waco, Texas Home for Evangelical Aged . . . nor for Bugger Bognor Conservative Association.1 -
A Corbynite no less.Sandpit said:
Jared O’Mara still takes some beating as the worst MP of the 21st century.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
Jeremy Corbyn fans please explain.0 -
Yes you can well imagine a few US headliners turning up to make a point, and the police ignoring them in the knowledge that they have serious money for lawyers if required. They’re not going to actually arrest a Joe Rogan or Dave Chappelle.viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.
The hundreds of unknown (and poor) comics who play to small audiences at the Fringe, on the other hand… would be well advised to join the Free Speech Union.0 -
My son told me his story: it's absolutely insane.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
My nominee is I.T. Trebitsch-Lincoln.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Trebitsch-Lincoln1 -
Why nothing will changercs1000 said:@bigjohnowls
I look forward you posting - and celebrating - the upcoming record performance of Starmer, when he registers more Labour votes in England than Corbyn achieved in 2017.
What POLICY are you looking forward to as a positive change under SKS0 -
Fringe has been saturated for years, so a few less tripe merchants will be fine with everyone, and with no discernible impact on jobs.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Indeed a smaller Fringe would be desirable given the recent changes in the lkaw to ensure that housing is reclaimed for locals despite the tantrums of precisely those Fringe types who demanded that local people continue to be evicted for August to suit their convenience.0 -
'Twas me, oh SSI2. My argument was based on the belief that most Republicans who are anti-trans are also anti-abortion, and vice versaSeaShantyIrish2 said:With respect to the Great Trans Debate, a PBer (forget who) opined recently, that unlike in UK, in US the trans issue was "subsumed" (think that was the term) into/by the debate over abortion in wake of repeal of Roe v Wade.
Which is NOT really correct, at least IMHO.
For example, the recent MAGA-manufactured flap over coincidence of Easter (a notoriously "movable feast") being same day as Transgender Visibility Day.
Which as far as I can tell, had ZERO to do with the pro-life versus pro-choice controversy.
Personally think that GOPer politicos and their mouthpieces are banging the anti-trans drum so loudly, is because of its appeal to voters BEYOND the core pro-life constituency.
That is, to folks who are either pro-choice or ambivalent on abortion, BUT who (for whatever reason) are opposed to and/or repulsed by gender-bending.
Note that there was similar dynamic a generation ago, when GOP campaigned with vigor against gays and lesbians. For example, with TV campaign ads featuring the alleged debauchery of San Francisco Gay Pride parades.
So GOP nutbags still making a meal of the homophobia, but beyond this, the MAGA-GOP has switched to anti-trans, as having broader (ahem) appeal.
Compare and contrast the two maps here: The overlay, whilst not exact (Montana!), is apparent. Although I am sympathetic to your add-on theory: buy one, get one free so to speak.0 -
These would be even better advised to stay at home. It's been an open secret for years that the Fringe is declining in terms of rewards - both money and career promotion.Sandpit said:
Yes you can well imagine a few US headliners turning up to make a point, and the police ignoring them in the knowledge that they have serious money for lawyers if required. They’re not going to actually arrest a Joe Rogan or Dave Chappelle.viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.
The hundreds of unknown (and poor) comics who play to small audiences at the Fringe, on the other hand… would be well advised to join the Free Speech Union.0 -
I see the Conservatives are desperately trying to downplay expectations on the May elections.HYUFD said:Yes we have all out elections too. That includes council seats in new wards in areas that were up in bad years locally for the Tories, ie 2023 and 2022 as well as the better year of 2021.
That combined with fewer seats being up than last year and a reasonable performance by Susan Hall given current polls mean the local elections, although bad, won't be bad enough for Sunak to be removed by Tory MPs and he will survive until the general election as leader and PM
We can do better than that - what's a "reasonable performance" by Susan Hall, the 35% achieved by Shaun Bailey, 30%?, 25%?
As for the local and PCC contests, we can take a view as well. As for the former, how about losing Dudley to Labour and Dorset to the LDs? What about the eight Conservative held District Councils with all up elections?
They would be Basildon, Epping Forest, Fareham, Gloucester, Harlow, Havant, Nuneaton & Bedworth and Redditch? Would losing control of half of those represent a bad night? What about losing control of all of them?
The Conservatives currently have 30 of the 39 PCCs in England and Wales having won the 2021 elections by 14.5 points. What would be a bad night in your view - losing ten, losing twenty?
0 -
Disabled bloke living next door to TSETheScreamingEagles said:
A Corbynite no less.Sandpit said:
Jared O’Mara still takes some beating as the worst MP of the 21st century.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
Jeremy Corbyn fans please explain.
Not even that is an excuse.0 -
How anyone thought Sunak wasn't useless is beyond me. If you all just read my posts I've been saying it since 2020!Foxy said:
Victoria Atkins at Health and Social care always looks very out her depth. Like a rabbit in the headlights every time.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
But perhaps the best example is Sunak himself.1 -
Well planning reform, which would get a lot of infrastructure built including lots of new telecoms masts!bigjohnowls said:
Why nothing will changercs1000 said:@bigjohnowls
I look forward you posting - and celebrating - the upcoming record performance of Starmer, when he registers more Labour votes in England than Corbyn achieved in 2017.
What POLICY are you looking forward to as a positive change under SKS0 -
I suspect the biggest hit to The Fringe is liable to be the astronomical cost of running a show there now, for comparatively little gain given the quickest route to getting noticed may well be social media.viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.0 -
Jared O’Maraydoethur said:
Nicky Morgan.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?0 -
Evening all,
Having Sunak out and about all the time meeting real people and taking questions on local radio is working out well I see.
2 -
He's just a bit, weird.rottenborough said:Evening all,
Having Sunak out and about all the time meeting real people and taking questions on local radio is working out well I see.0 -
It would make a good film!rcs1000 said:
My son told me his story: it's absolutely insane.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
My nominee is I.T. Trebitsch-Lincoln.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Has there ever been an MP more out of their depth than Gillian Keegan?
Perhaps Helen Whately?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Trebitsch-Lincoln1 -
Somebody once said Rishi Sunak sounds like Tony Blair. Wrong.
He's like Ed Miliband.0 -
...and if you then overlay the immigration governor map... ...there's a knot of states whose legislators are anti-trans, anti-abortion and anti-immigration, and wouldn't wee on Biden if he was afire. Whether the US electorate are pro- or anti- these things will be the key to POTUS2024viewcode said:
'Twas me, oh SSI2. My argument was based on the belief that most Republicans who are anti-trans are also anti-abortion, and vice versaSeaShantyIrish2 said:With respect to the Great Trans Debate, a PBer (forget who) opined recently, that unlike in UK, in US the trans issue was "subsumed" (think that was the term) into/by the debate over abortion in wake of repeal of Roe v Wade.
Which is NOT really correct, at least IMHO.
For example, the recent MAGA-manufactured flap over coincidence of Easter (a notoriously "movable feast") being same day as Transgender Visibility Day.
Which as far as I can tell, had ZERO to do with the pro-life versus pro-choice controversy.
Personally think that GOPer politicos and their mouthpieces are banging the anti-trans drum so loudly, is because of its appeal to voters BEYOND the core pro-life constituency.
That is, to folks who are either pro-choice or ambivalent on abortion, BUT who (for whatever reason) are opposed to and/or repulsed by gender-bending.
Note that there was similar dynamic a generation ago, when GOP campaigned with vigor against gays and lesbians. For example, with TV campaign ads featuring the alleged debauchery of San Francisco Gay Pride parades.
So GOP nutbags still making a meal of the homophobia, but beyond this, the MAGA-GOP has switched to anti-trans, as having broader (ahem) appeal.
Compare and contrast the two maps here: The overlay, whilst not exact (Montana!), is apparent. Although I am sympathetic to your add-on theory: buy one, get one free so to speak.0 -
The clown is always on about racism , he practices it himself , re the nursery where he had to drop the charges as it was just rubbish , and constantly saying there are too many white people in Scotland, and on and on . The man is a moron and invites trouble at every cut and turn. A real roaster "family man " as well allegedly. He really needs to be ousted ASAP.TheScreamingEagles said:Have we done this?
Humza Yousaf has said it is "increasingly difficult" to shield his children from racism after he was targeted with Islamophobic graffiti near his Dundee home.
Racist slurs relating to the Scottish first minister's Pakistani heritage were sprayed on the walls and fences of homes in a street in Broughty Ferry, on Monday.
It is near to where the first minister lives with his wife and two children.
The graffiti, which has since been removed, happened on the day the Scottish government's controversial new hate crime laws came into force.
https://news.sky.com/story/first-minister-humza-yousaf-condemns-racist-graffiti-aimed-at-him-near-dundee-home-13106494
Not that that at all justifies the brain dead morons who did the racist graffiti, though state of the country and the education system etc is all under his control.
1 -
Sounds absolutely hilarious...viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.2 -
Israel has lost even more credibility today. It's time for the US to say some kind words to get them to stop.1
-
Section 6 of the attached far betterBatteryCorrectHorse said:
Well planning reform, which would get a lot of infrastructure built including lots of new telecoms masts!bigjohnowls said:
Why nothing will changercs1000 said:@bigjohnowls
I look forward you posting - and celebrating - the upcoming record performance of Starmer, when he registers more Labour votes in England than Corbyn achieved in 2017.
What POLICY are you looking forward to as a positive change under SKS
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf0 -
Nothing that five years of hostility couldn't have beaten out of him.rottenborough said:Evening all,
Having Sunak out and about all the time meeting real people and taking questions on local radio is working out well I see.
The old system- go and fight someone hopeless first, have some setbacks on the way up- had a lot to commend it.
(See Starmer as well. He got a fair bit wrong on the early years, mostly due to inexperience.)0 -
BJO, Corbyn lost. Twice. We need to move on. Labour is about to win a landslide, be happy!bigjohnowls said:
Section 6 of the attached far betterBatteryCorrectHorse said:
Well planning reform, which would get a lot of infrastructure built including lots of new telecoms masts!bigjohnowls said:
Why nothing will changercs1000 said:@bigjohnowls
I look forward you posting - and celebrating - the upcoming record performance of Starmer, when he registers more Labour votes in England than Corbyn achieved in 2017.
What POLICY are you looking forward to as a positive change under SKS
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf1 -
Too much even for the assorted dreck on their backbenches.BatteryCorrectHorse said:So they're going to fine homeless people.
Do homeless people have a lot of money to pay fines?
Ministers face Tory revolt over plans to criminalise rough sleeping
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/01/ministers-face-tory-revolt-over-plans-to-criminalise-rough-sleeping
0 -
Wouldn’t the law, prior to this hate crime legislation, dealt with that graffiti anyway ? It’s not,like it’s a new law brought in to deal with it. Or am I mistaken ?malcolmg said:
The clown is always on about racism , he practices it himself , re the nursery where he had to drop the charges as it was just rubbish , and constantly saying there are too many white people in Scotland, and on and on . The man is a moron and invites trouble at every cut and turn. A real roaster "family man " as well allegedly. He really needs to be ousted ASAP.TheScreamingEagles said:Have we done this?
Humza Yousaf has said it is "increasingly difficult" to shield his children from racism after he was targeted with Islamophobic graffiti near his Dundee home.
Racist slurs relating to the Scottish first minister's Pakistani heritage were sprayed on the walls and fences of homes in a street in Broughty Ferry, on Monday.
It is near to where the first minister lives with his wife and two children.
The graffiti, which has since been removed, happened on the day the Scottish government's controversial new hate crime laws came into force.
https://news.sky.com/story/first-minister-humza-yousaf-condemns-racist-graffiti-aimed-at-him-near-dundee-home-13106494
Not that that at all justifies the brain dead morons who did the racist graffiti, though state of the country and the education system etc is all under his control.1 -
I’m sure our resident apologist for all things Israeli regime will be around to justify Israels actions imminently.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Israel has lost even more credibility today. It's time for the US to say some kind words to get them to stop.
1 -
Already is. Plus a month's personal accommodation in Edinburgh now that evictions of locals, and Airbnb, are under much more control by the council and performers can't just walk into a nice flat near the centre.MJW said:
I suspect the biggest hit to The Fringe is liable to be the astronomical cost of running a show there now, for comparatively little gain given the quickest route to getting noticed may well be social media.viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.
0 -
That's my take fwiw.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.0 -
Why would I want policies? All governments do is fuck things up. I am looking for masterly inaction.bigjohnowls said:
Why nothing will changercs1000 said:@bigjohnowls
I look forward you posting - and celebrating - the upcoming record performance of Starmer, when he registers more Labour votes in England than Corbyn achieved in 2017.
What POLICY are you looking forward to as a positive change under SKS0 -
You're not mistaken. And malky is right - and how many times can you say that?Taz said:
Wouldn’t the law, prior to this hate crime legislation, dealt with that graffiti anyway ? It’s not,like it’s a new law brought in to deal with it. Or am I mistaken ?malcolmg said:
The clown is always on about racism , he practices it himself , re the nursery where he had to drop the charges as it was just rubbish , and constantly saying there are too many white people in Scotland, and on and on . The man is a moron and invites trouble at every cut and turn. A real roaster "family man " as well allegedly. He really needs to be ousted ASAP.TheScreamingEagles said:Have we done this?
Humza Yousaf has said it is "increasingly difficult" to shield his children from racism after he was targeted with Islamophobic graffiti near his Dundee home.
Racist slurs relating to the Scottish first minister's Pakistani heritage were sprayed on the walls and fences of homes in a street in Broughty Ferry, on Monday.
It is near to where the first minister lives with his wife and two children.
The graffiti, which has since been removed, happened on the day the Scottish government's controversial new hate crime laws came into force.
https://news.sky.com/story/first-minister-humza-yousaf-condemns-racist-graffiti-aimed-at-him-near-dundee-home-13106494
Not that that at all justifies the brain dead morons who did the racist graffiti, though state of the country and the education system etc is all under his control.0 -
Aww, we're friends todayTaz said:
I’m sure our resident apologist for all things Israeli regime will be around to justify Israels actions imminently.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Israel has lost even more credibility today. It's time for the US to say some kind words to get them to stop.
0 -
In any case, all this is a fine example of the fallacy that Scotland only counts during August, and only insofar as it affects performers and attendees at the Edinburgh International Arts Festival, or rather how they think it does, despite their complete lack of knowledge of the place. The Graun is particularly prone to this.MJW said:
I suspect the biggest hit to The Fringe is liable to be the astronomical cost of running a show there now, for comparatively little gain given the quickest route to getting noticed may well be social media.viewcode said:
I betcha that it will be full to busting of comedians, American and otherwise, whose entire act will consist of skits cumulating in the phrase "....and try to arrest me for that, Scottish Government, yeah!", whilst being in absolutely no danger of arrest.Sandpit said:
The comments from many in the Scottish Government on the matter appear somewhat different. I shall defer to the excellent Mrs @Cyclefree and yesterday’s header on the subject.Foxy said:
Either that of the hype over the law was substantially bunkum all along, and never intended to inhibit opinions like hers.Sandpit said:
Jo Rowling knows they’ll never go after her, as she has basically unlimited financial resources and a worldwide media profile.malcolmg said:
They would never fight her in court, they will save it for their secret register where the plebs don't even know they have been marked down for some fkucwitted moron's opinion. Plod will take easy option. It is all virtue signalling by the clowns running the SNP and ruining the country, a bigger bunch of rubbish you would struggle to find.kinabalu said:
Yes. There was never any possibility of her comments being deemed to be potentially criminal.viewcode said:
Wasn't this already known up front? Specifically, that the exposition of gender critical thought was not within the remit of the thing.Scott_xP said:@SkyNews
BREAKING: JK Rowling's comments about new hate crime laws "are not assessed to be criminal", police have said, as they confirmed no further action would be taken
What I think she’s doing, is to get police and prosecutors to quickly define where they are drawing the line, such that others can use the same defences in future. She’ll probably speak out, and possibly even dip into her pocket for a few lawyers, if she sees that initial standard being eroded over time.
It’s also worth noting that this discussion has crossed the Pond - here’s an epic five-hour podcast with Joe Rogan and four comedian friends last week, that opened with discussions about this new law. https://youtube.com/watch?v=cV71YMAwIXY
It’s fair to say that not many American comics will turn up in Edinburgh this year, if they feel that their speech might be policed by the actual Scottish police. That’s a direct hit to the Scottish economy, for as long as it takes for the actual implications of this law to become known by case law and appellate courts.
Safe danger. The best kind of danger. If you can afford it.0 -
Bart will just say it's part of a war.Taz said:
I’m sure our resident apologist for all things Israeli regime will be around to justify Israels actions imminently.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Israel has lost even more credibility today. It's time for the US to say some kind words to get them to stop.
Let's be honest, Israel and the IDF will kill anyone who gets in their way. There have been so many "accidents" now, nobody can convince me they're even trying to be careful.
So not only are they radicalising a whole new generation of nutjobs, they're killing totally innocent people there to help.
But it's a war, so who cares?0
