Political betting dominates the news – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
I didn't need more evidence that Trump is a dangerous, delusional figure, but the crypto bros going his way certainly cements that fact.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump is winning the crypto bro vote...
https://x.com/tyler/status/18038728599385499201 -
This is why I could never have a holiday home. Buggering off to Portugal for a week in February, yes. But buggering off for two months? I'd miss so much. Taking the same walk through the same landscape every week or two weeks all year is a great pleasure.Foxy said:
I like having different seasons. Hoar frost, snow, solemn November greyness, the whiff of autumn in September, the freshness and greenest of Spring.turbotubbs said:
Yep, hands up I love the snow and cold. But there are plenty who chase the summer warmth too. I think we are pretty lucky in the U.K. to have pretty decent seasons, albeit I am sad at the influence of climate change on U.K. winters.TimS said:
You are of course one of the PBers who is also a weather geek, like me.turbotubbs said:
Pulling the curtains, lighting the fire and engaging in your own form of nesting, love it.eristdoof said:
Autumn is far from "Best of all". Drizzle, winter jackets taken out of the wardrobe to be used every day for the next 5 months, humidity jumps through the roof, central heating turned on. No more evenings outside at the pub ... and term starts again. The only savng grace is colourful leaves and it not being as cold as January!algarkirk said:
You have to bank the plusses that you can. On 21st December I tell myself it's all getting better for the next 6 months. Great. On 21st June I tell myself that summer is not over till at least well into September and there is 3 months to go. And then, I say, autumn is often the best of all. And then it's December again. Snowdrops...and so it goes on.SandyRentool said:
So the nights are drawing in. Wonderful.Pulpstar said:9 minutes past the solstice. Start of astronomical summer 🌞🌞
It's always surprised me how many weather geeks - almost certainly a majority - love cold weather and particularly snow. They go mad for it. I've been a contributor to weather forums for a couple of decades now and my activity seems to be the inverse of most: I am most interested in summer weather, heatwaves and thunderstorms, and couldn't care less about winter.
It's variety that makes our climate so interesting.1 -
I recall once being told in the future we would have only two seasons - the one with cold sludge, and the one with warm sludge.Foxy said:
I like having different seasons. Hoar frost, snow, solemn November greyness, the whiff of autumn in September, the freshness and greenest of Spring.turbotubbs said:
Yep, hands up I love the snow and cold. But there are plenty who chase the summer warmth too. I think we are pretty lucky in the U.K. to have pretty decent seasons, albeit I am sad at the influence of climate change on U.K. winters.TimS said:
You are of course one of the PBers who is also a weather geek, like me.turbotubbs said:
Pulling the curtains, lighting the fire and engaging in your own form of nesting, love it.eristdoof said:
Autumn is far from "Best of all". Drizzle, winter jackets taken out of the wardrobe to be used every day for the next 5 months, humidity jumps through the roof, central heating turned on. No more evenings outside at the pub ... and term starts again. The only savng grace is colourful leaves and it not being as cold as January!algarkirk said:
You have to bank the plusses that you can. On 21st December I tell myself it's all getting better for the next 6 months. Great. On 21st June I tell myself that summer is not over till at least well into September and there is 3 months to go. And then, I say, autumn is often the best of all. And then it's December again. Snowdrops...and so it goes on.SandyRentool said:
So the nights are drawing in. Wonderful.Pulpstar said:9 minutes past the solstice. Start of astronomical summer 🌞🌞
It's always surprised me how many weather geeks - almost certainly a majority - love cold weather and particularly snow. They go mad for it. I've been a contributor to weather forums for a couple of decades now and my activity seems to be the inverse of most: I am most interested in summer weather, heatwaves and thunderstorms, and couldn't care less about winter.
It's variety that makes our climate so interesting.0 -
Which should tell us something - first, it's harder to solve than people pretend, and second, that the electorate didn't really care that much before now, at least not enough compared to other issues, which explains why not doing something was the chosen option.Andy_JS said:
They've had 14 years to do something about this and haven't. That's the problem.kle4 said:
Why not? The Tories want to go hard on immigration, say that Labour will not, and tell Reform voters (who they believe to be most exercised by immigration) that they share their concerns and set out the risk if they let in a Labour government.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
A video of a red carpet being rolled out on the beach if peopel vote Labour fits that message.1 -
Only if you think Tory and Conservative voters are fungible. On major social issues, current Tory voters are closer to Labour than they are to Reform voters.Andy_JS said:
Makes sense when the combined Tory/Reform share is about 38% and Cameron won a majority in 2015 with less than that.wooliedyed said:Sunaks tactics pretty clear, positive reception for his performance tonight from the likes of Oakeshott and Patrick O'Flynn. The hunt for Reform votes is on
They will lose as many as they gain.0 -
Spooky similarity of composition, though I think I prefer my light.Leon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
1 -
Lib Dem hold in Tiverton Westexe on similar gap to last time over Cons, maybe a bit of a swing to LDs1
-
Wouldn't you just do something like require rentals to have an advertised price? You can still pick which tenant you want, and discount down if you like. But you can't ratchet it up. It doesn't stop prices going up (you just raise the advertised price) but it is more transparent.FrancisUrquhart said:
This appears to be Starmer's solution to lots of things. Have a new quango regulator and nanny state stuff....and he can do this because the Tories have been proposing similar BS.MikeL said:If Starmer is going to have some regulator telling landlords which prospective tenant they have to choose then many landlords will say "No thanks" and just sell up.
OK, it may push house prices down a bit. But it will leave a situation where if people aren't able to buy then they'll have no choice whatsoever other than to stay with Mum and Dad.0 -
Flip-flopper.0 -
As someone who had to offer £50 per month extra to persuade a jittery landlord that it was ok to rent to a self employed person, I value the flexibility. If the price were fixed, I would simply have been denied.mwadams said:
Wouldn't you just do something like require rentals to have an advertised price? You can still pick which tenant you want, and discount down if you like. But you can't ratchet it up. It doesn't stop prices going up (you just raise the advertised price) but it is more transparent.FrancisUrquhart said:
This appears to be Starmer's solution to lots of things. Have a new quango regulator and nanny state stuff....and he can do this because the Tories have been proposing similar BS.MikeL said:If Starmer is going to have some regulator telling landlords which prospective tenant they have to choose then many landlords will say "No thanks" and just sell up.
OK, it may push house prices down a bit. But it will leave a situation where if people aren't able to buy then they'll have no choice whatsoever other than to stay with Mum and Dad.1 -
Do you know where Leon's photo is?Theuniondivvie said:
Spooky similarity of composition, though I think I prefer my light.Leon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
0 -
Both Billionaires who expressed their new found love for the Labour party a couple of days ago have a long and recent history of standing for everything Starmer doesn't. I don't think they will remain best buds for very long.carnforth said:
Flip-flopper.0 -
Worth watching tonight’s by-election results. 1 Tory defence in Mansfield, which should go to Labour on current polling. 2 Lib Dem defences, 2 safe Labour defences.
https://x.com/andrewteale/status/1803920646130536829?s=46
Annoyingly in none of these seats is Reform standing, so we have no way of testing their current polling. Says a lot about the party’s commitment to actual electoral politics and administration.1 -
No, good guess - Richmond it is, with some friends, having a midsummer drinkAndy_JS said:
Where is this? I was going to say Richmond but don't think so.Leon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
It was absolutely lovely, and it stayed lovely until dark, when a lustrous moon arose. Delightful1 -
3 LD defences not 2, they have held Tiverton, labour held the delayed Coventry ward so farTimS said:Worth watching tonight’s by-election results. 1 Tory defence in Mansfield, which should go to Labour on current polling. 2 Lib Dem defences, 2 safe Labour defences.
https://x.com/andrewteale/status/1803920646130536829?s=46
Annoyingly in none of these seats is Reform standing, so we have no way of testing their current polling. Says a lot about the party’s commitment to actual electoral politics and administration.1 -
Idea for a competition: if the Tories are reduced to 50 seats, which 50 would they be?0
-
Conservatives holding up OK in both. They certainly don’t seem to be completely collapsing on the basis of council by-elections during this campaign.wooliedyed said:
3 LD defences not 2, they have held Tiverton, labour held the delayed Coventry ward so farTimS said:Worth watching tonight’s by-election results. 1 Tory defence in Mansfield, which should go to Labour on current polling. 2 Lib Dem defences, 2 safe Labour defences.
https://x.com/andrewteale/status/1803920646130536829?s=46
Annoyingly in none of these seats is Reform standing, so we have no way of testing their current polling. Says a lot about the party’s commitment to actual electoral politics and administration.0 -
? They can control what u publish in other outlets?Leon said:
Sorry. @cicero and @TSE have told me not to mention any of this, apologies. Blame themTweedledee said:
https://www.kelpcanteen.com/Leon said:
You want me to mention it in a piece for the gazette or whoever? I can do that. DM meTweedledee said:
Personal requestLeon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
There's a little caravan on Custom House Quay in Falmouth knocking out river Fal oysters at 4 for a tenner. It's important for my wellbeing that this place stays in business, so please patronise it. That is all.
These guys, and my only interest is I want to be able to keep on eating their oysters when I am in Falmouth. So yes a heads up in the gazette would be awesome.0 -
With all due respect, you Conservatives could have changed to a fairer, more proportional voting system in any one of the 51 years you have been in power over the last 75 years. I for one would have been quite content for you to have done that.FrankBooth said:
Sorry but we could be looking at a result that is a whole different scale to anything we have seen before. Wasn't there a poll suggesting over 500 Labour MPs with less than 40% of the vote? And possibly with the Lib Dems as the official opposition?Jonathan said:
The 2019 result was disproportionate as were many others. It’s a feature of non proportional representation systems. The trick is to disapprove when it favours your side.darkage said:This election is getting me worried about the future of democracy. It seems likely that Labour will get a disproportionate majority which is a serious distortion of their share of the vote. The 'right' on the other hand will be severely underrepresented in Parliament relative to their eventual share of the vote (probably circa 40%). The driving force for Labour in power will be passing legislation they want, which they will effectively be able to do with no opposition. I suppose this is the 'supermajority' fear that the conservatives are trying to play to , but it seems to me like a big danger for democracy, because the position of the party in power will not be seen as legitimate.
You are bellyaching now because FPTP no longer appears to advantage your side. Diddums!3 -
True enough, but i think the reckoning is comingTimS said:
Conservatives holding up OK in both. They certainly don’t seem to be completely collapsing on the basis of council by-elections during this campaign.wooliedyed said:
3 LD defences not 2, they have held Tiverton, labour held the delayed Coventry ward so farTimS said:Worth watching tonight’s by-election results. 1 Tory defence in Mansfield, which should go to Labour on current polling. 2 Lib Dem defences, 2 safe Labour defences.
https://x.com/andrewteale/status/1803920646130536829?s=46
Annoyingly in none of these seats is Reform standing, so we have no way of testing their current polling. Says a lot about the party’s commitment to actual electoral politics and administration.0 -
I know it's not quite this simple, but it does seem odd to say their Net Zero plans are absurd because they will force some oil and gas producers out of business. That seems harsh but consistent.carnforth said:
Flip-flopper.
(But yes, I do appreciate the argument that this wouldn't reduce fossil fuel production but simply move it to other fields around the world.)0 -
Lab Leak was dismissed - by all of "the science", including the Lancet, in a now provably fraudulent letter - as "a racist conspiracy theory". As such we were literally banned from talking about it for a year, even as a concept, on Twitter and Facebook - largely at the behest of the Biden administration, to an extent where it actually troubled Nick CleggFarooq said:
Listen up, stupid fuck. The starting point is that extraordinary claims require evidence. You think there are conspiracies to steal elections in this country? Put up some evidence. Asking people to come up with evidence that something DIDN'T happen is -- and you should stop for a moment here to think about how obvious this is -- witless.Tweedledee said:
There's nothing more logically vacuous than dismissing a theory as a conspiracy theory. The implication is that it is unthinkable and historically unknown for a lot of people to do a bad thing and conspire to cover it up. As in Hur Hur, are you really claiming that a bunch of highly respected establishment figures including numerous distinguished lawyers and headed by a vicar, conspired to put literally hundreds of innocent people in jail? Hur Hur.Farooq said:
You really need to be careful about going down this conspiracy theory route. We in Scotland have had a couple of years head start after the 2014 referendum when idiotic tales were going round that you should use a pen instead of a pencil because the "security services" will erase your Yes vote and replace it with a No vote.MisterBedfordshire said:
Thanks.Farooq said:
I got that wrong, and I apologise.MisterBedfordshire said:
Charming. Especially, given that I did no such thing.Farooq said:
Oh, this nonsense reminds me that I never got around to telling you to fuck off for calling for people to be drowned.MisterBedfordshire said:I heard an interesting conspiracy theory a couple of years ago about the Brexit referendum that allegedly originated with mail workers.
It was that the general shock from the top politicians when the result came in was because the spooks had seen to it that a large amount of remain postal ballots had been inserted into the system (much easier to do with a national referendum than 650 constituencies) to make sure of the result - and despite this they still lost.
So, er, fuck off.
There, glad I got that off my chest.
Your conspiracy theory is still nonsense.
In the cold light of day I could have worded it better but appreciate your comment.
Yes it probably is nonsense but amusing nonetheless to think of the security services trying to be James Bond and ending up being Basildon Bond.
This is the stock in trade of those who want to undermine out democracy by undermining our faith in democracy. For example, Russia. They put these stories about to harm us.
The same story about pens went about in 2016 at the EU referendum, and a few of us up here were "aye, right, we've seen this one before". Since then all kinds of crap has been said and amplified. They spread because they're interesting, but before forwarding them you should ask whether you have any evidence and whether spreading a false rumour of this nature can be harmful. If the answers are "no" and "yes", please exercise restraint and keep it to yourself. We, and our democracy, have enemies. Don't do their work for them.
The triumph of the conspiracy theory theory was in the second world war, when reports of the shoah were largely discounted because Hur Hur we had this last time round with Belgian atrocities, you always get this exaggerated nonsense in time of war. Ignore.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how stupid supports evil. If you think a thesis is wrong attack it with evidence, not with a useless heuristic about "conspiracy theories."
Now, given that I also made a claim, that Russia attempts to interfere with Western politics through disinformation and that we all need to be on guard for this, it's only fair I direct you to some evidence for that.
USA:
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-committee-releases-bipartisan-report-russia’s-use-social-media
UK:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-exposes-attempted-russian-cyber-interference-in-politics-and-democratic-processes
Germany:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/26/germany-unearths-pro-russia-disinformation-campaign-on-x
These a metric fucktonne of this stuff if you want to gorge yourself silly.
Now, go back and think about the claims that started this... MI5 or whoever fiddled some vote here. Where's the evidence? Oh, you don't have any? THAT is why it's a conspiracy theory. Moron.
Now it turns out Lab Leak is almost certainly true0 -
@Cicero is a wanker, but @TSE limits me on what I can talk about and do on PB, to a serious extent, such that it limits my ability to discuss things on here and then take them elsewhere and publishNunu5 said:
? They can control what u publish in other outlets?Leon said:
Sorry. @cicero and @TSE have told me not to mention any of this, apologies. Blame themTweedledee said:
https://www.kelpcanteen.com/Leon said:
You want me to mention it in a piece for the gazette or whoever? I can do that. DM meTweedledee said:
Personal requestLeon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
There's a little caravan on Custom House Quay in Falmouth knocking out river Fal oysters at 4 for a tenner. It's important for my wellbeing that this place stays in business, so please patronise it. That is all.
These guys, and my only interest is I want to be able to keep on eating their oysters when I am in Falmouth. So yes a heads up in the gazette would be awesome.
Speak to the authorities0 -
I don't know what your rent is, but an extra £50 a month doesn't sound like it gives the landlord any meaningful extra security if you suddenly can't make the rent - it sounds like an excuse to stiff you for an extra.£50/month.carnforth said:
As someone who had to offer £50 per month extra to persuade a jittery landlord that it was ok to rent to a self employed person, I value the flexibility. If the price were fixed, I would simply have been denied.mwadams said:
Wouldn't you just do something like require rentals to have an advertised price? You can still pick which tenant you want, and discount down if you like. But you can't ratchet it up. It doesn't stop prices going up (you just raise the advertised price) but it is more transparent.FrancisUrquhart said:
This appears to be Starmer's solution to lots of things. Have a new quango regulator and nanny state stuff....and he can do this because the Tories have been proposing similar BS.MikeL said:If Starmer is going to have some regulator telling landlords which prospective tenant they have to choose then many landlords will say "No thanks" and just sell up.
OK, it may push house prices down a bit. But it will leave a situation where if people aren't able to buy then they'll have no choice whatsoever other than to stay with Mum and Dad.0 -
Genius!kle4 said:
Why not? The Tories want to go hard on immigration, say that Labour will not, and tell Reform voters (who they believe to be most exercised by immigration) that they share their concerns and set out the risk if they let in a Labour government.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
A video of a red carpet being rolled out on the beach if peopel vote Labour fits that message.
I have however noted a flaw in your wizard wheeze. The Conservatives have been in office during a period of eye-watering immigration, if that sort of concern floats your boat.
Just a minor technicality, I guess.1 -
They've annoyed everyone on this subject. It's surprising 20% still support them.Mexicanpete said:
Genius!kle4 said:
Why not? The Tories want to go hard on immigration, say that Labour will not, and tell Reform voters (who they believe to be most exercised by immigration) that they share their concerns and set out the risk if they let in a Labour government.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
A video of a red carpet being rolled out on the beach if peopel vote Labour fits that message.
I have however noted a flaw in your wizard wheeze. The Conservatives have been in office during a period of eye-watering immigration, if that sort of concern floats your boat.
Just a minor technicality, I guess.2 -
Its amazing how the Lancet editor, despite scandal after scandal appears to be in the vicinity of them and yet there he still is.Leon said:
Lab Leak was dismissed - by all of "the science", including the Lancet, in a now provably fraudulent letter - as "a racist conspiracy theory". As such we were literally banned from talking about it for a year, even as a concept, on Twitter and Facebook - largely at the behest of the Biden administration, to an extent where it actually troubled Nick CleggFarooq said:
Listen up, stupid fuck. The starting point is that extraordinary claims require evidence. You think there are conspiracies to steal elections in this country? Put up some evidence. Asking people to come up with evidence that something DIDN'T happen is -- and you should stop for a moment here to think about how obvious this is -- witless.Tweedledee said:
There's nothing more logically vacuous than dismissing a theory as a conspiracy theory. The implication is that it is unthinkable and historically unknown for a lot of people to do a bad thing and conspire to cover it up. As in Hur Hur, are you really claiming that a bunch of highly respected establishment figures including numerous distinguished lawyers and headed by a vicar, conspired to put literally hundreds of innocent people in jail? Hur Hur.Farooq said:
You really need to be careful about going down this conspiracy theory route. We in Scotland have had a couple of years head start after the 2014 referendum when idiotic tales were going round that you should use a pen instead of a pencil because the "security services" will erase your Yes vote and replace it with a No vote.MisterBedfordshire said:
Thanks.Farooq said:
I got that wrong, and I apologise.MisterBedfordshire said:
Charming. Especially, given that I did no such thing.Farooq said:
Oh, this nonsense reminds me that I never got around to telling you to fuck off for calling for people to be drowned.MisterBedfordshire said:I heard an interesting conspiracy theory a couple of years ago about the Brexit referendum that allegedly originated with mail workers.
It was that the general shock from the top politicians when the result came in was because the spooks had seen to it that a large amount of remain postal ballots had been inserted into the system (much easier to do with a national referendum than 650 constituencies) to make sure of the result - and despite this they still lost.
So, er, fuck off.
There, glad I got that off my chest.
Your conspiracy theory is still nonsense.
In the cold light of day I could have worded it better but appreciate your comment.
Yes it probably is nonsense but amusing nonetheless to think of the security services trying to be James Bond and ending up being Basildon Bond.
This is the stock in trade of those who want to undermine out democracy by undermining our faith in democracy. For example, Russia. They put these stories about to harm us.
The same story about pens went about in 2016 at the EU referendum, and a few of us up here were "aye, right, we've seen this one before". Since then all kinds of crap has been said and amplified. They spread because they're interesting, but before forwarding them you should ask whether you have any evidence and whether spreading a false rumour of this nature can be harmful. If the answers are "no" and "yes", please exercise restraint and keep it to yourself. We, and our democracy, have enemies. Don't do their work for them.
The triumph of the conspiracy theory theory was in the second world war, when reports of the shoah were largely discounted because Hur Hur we had this last time round with Belgian atrocities, you always get this exaggerated nonsense in time of war. Ignore.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how stupid supports evil. If you think a thesis is wrong attack it with evidence, not with a useless heuristic about "conspiracy theories."
Now, given that I also made a claim, that Russia attempts to interfere with Western politics through disinformation and that we all need to be on guard for this, it's only fair I direct you to some evidence for that.
USA:
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-committee-releases-bipartisan-report-russia’s-use-social-media
UK:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-exposes-attempted-russian-cyber-interference-in-politics-and-democratic-processes
Germany:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/26/germany-unearths-pro-russia-disinformation-campaign-on-x
These a metric fucktonne of this stuff if you want to gorge yourself silly.
Now, go back and think about the claims that started this... MI5 or whoever fiddled some vote here. Where's the evidence? Oh, you don't have any? THAT is why it's a conspiracy theory. Moron.
Now it turns out Lab Leak is almost certainly true1 -
No credibility !kle4 said:
Why not? The Tories want to go hard on immigration, say that Labour will not, and tell Reform voters (who they believe to be most exercised by immigration) that they share their concerns and set out the risk if they let in a Labour government.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
A video of a red carpet being rolled out on the beach if peopel vote Labour fits that message.
This is the provlem is they can’t run their greatest hits for their base
Immigration… at record levels
Tax… at record high levels
National debt… at record highs
People trust an unknown starmer more than a known faailure
They clearly don’t want to talk about Covid or brexit
Even trust with Covid parties and dodgy bets and truss scarring the markets
Even that wouldn’t be so bad if sunak was likeable and relatable like boris or major but hes not
I’m convinced the no 1 quality for a party leader is to seem likeable or at least look strong and in control and fishy rishi does not have that0 -
Labour have taken the Mansfield seat from Cons, no figures yet
LDs cling on just to the two Oxfordshire seats, one by 12 votes from the greens (Tories only a further 40 votes behind) and on the county council by about 50 votes from the Tories. Swing against them in both0 -
A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/18035233165123339780 -
From Andrew Teale's by-election (council) preview:
"In recent local elections this corner of Oxfordshire has been an unmitigated disaster area for the Conservative Party. At the 2015 local elections the Conservatives won 33 out of 36 seats on South Oxfordshire council and 29 out of 38 in Vale of White Horse. Nine years later they now have one seat left in South Oxfordshire and have been completely wiped out in the Vale, whose composition now stands at 34 Lib Dems and 4 Greens."
As somebody who grew p in the area at that time the shift is not surprising, but is still remarkable. The people didn't leave the Tories - they either alienated them via failing to delivery or extremist rhetoric. I know a decent few formerly solid blues in each category - more who have fallen in each direction than remained with them.0 -
And they got community noted with claims of "murder".williamglenn said:A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/18035233165123339781 -
I agree - though I would put the same emphasis on Thailand or India (for example) as on Denmark.Farooq said:
Uh, no. I asked a perfectly legitimate question: how much do you want the government planning the economy?TOPPING said:
So no plans is your idea. That's bonkers. I'm not saying there's a right or a wrong number but just to wing it is absurd. Lab are building 1.5m houses. What if it's not enough. They are the government and it is reasonable to ask how big they want the population to be.Farooq said:
I would counter that with "how can businesses invest when they know the labour market is being made inflexible by quotas?"TOPPING said:On immigration: "How can you make a plan for the economy when you won't say how many people you want in the country "
How indeed.
Immigration means more jobs created. It's not obvious, I'll admit, but it's true.
Plus, how much do you actually want the government "planning" the economy? Do we want five year plans? I don't think we do. Let the market do its thing.
Me, I DO want the government inserting itself into house building, using the private sector and driving building forwards. I do NOT want the government setting limits on immigration. Yes there need to be RULES on immigration. But if there are vacancies that companies need filled, hiring from abroad is legitimate. Telling a company "sorry you're struggling to find someone, but you can't hire that person from Denmark because we've hit our target this year" is a recipe for buggering up the economy. Because companies in that situation will suffer from reduced inward investment and they will offshore operations to places where worker movement is more flexible.
Maybe there is some "correct" number of people there should be. I can't for the life of me think how you'd go about deciding that. What if you get your slide rule out and discover that the right number of 28,200,000? Then what?
As I said the other day, if people have a means of support (job or independent wealth) and do not pose a criminal or security threat to the country then it should not be the Government's business to prevent them coming to the UK.0 -
But the MP has the absolute right to decide to abandon the party if he disagrees with the direction of travel.bondegezou said:
Under FPTP, parties still have the power of picking the candidate.Richard_Tyndall said:
Any for of electoral system that makes it explicitely about the parties is worse than what we have now. At least here we make an effort to say it is about the individual candidates and some of us still vote on that basis. Most PR systems give more power to the parties at a time when we should be doing the exact oposite and trying to reduce the power of parties in our democracy.Nigelb said:
'Illegitimate' is a very poor choice of words - and it's beyond rich for the Tories to criticise a system which has benefitted them for so long, as soon as its effects turn against them.LostPassword said:
When I was criticising the right for pushing the idea that the next Labour government would be illegitimate because of its super-massive majority, I was not necessarily including you in that (it can be hard to keep track of every poster's political position), but more commenting on the many interventions to that effect from Conservative politicians and commentators.darkage said:I must correct the characterisation that I am on 'the right'. I have said several times that I am voting for Labour. I have however made a prediction that the next political movement in the UK will be on what people describe as the 'far right'. This is not something I want to happen, I just think it will, because of the likely failure of 'centrism' to take in to account opposing views on matters like immigration and cultural issues, views which a lot of people hold. This, and the fact of 'reactive dynamics', together with other global political shifts, mean that it seems very likely to me that people will start to look to the 'far right' for answers, as the 'left' has run out of road. The concern expressed in the last comment was that, if we have a situation where 40% of people vote for right wing parties, and these positions are barely represented in Parliament, then the situation starts to become worrying for democracy. The reaction to this point is quite revealing, it is just something that people have to just 'suck up'...
I have said before that the best model for dealing with the 'far right' is what has happened in Finland for the last 20 years, the people involved are bought in to the system, and it is somehow made to work.
But the criticism of FPTP is entirely correct.
It's better than no democracy at all, but it's a half arsed, often unfair version of democracy.
I would have been extremely happy if AV had won out but of course the Lib Dems had a tantrum over it.
I am not defending the current situation under FPTP. I am saying that it is bad as the parties have too much power but that PR based on party share will make it worse. It will provide the parties with a moral right within the democratic system.1 -
Not sure if this has been mentioned before but a great introductory paragraph to a comment piece on tonight's QT debate in the Telegraph:
"It’s never nice watching someone struggle. While some take a positive pleasure from watching a leader badly out of their depth flounder in a horribly mismanaged campaign, I just feel bad for them. And so it was with a distinct sense of relief that I turned off the England game, and started preparing for the Question Time special."4 -
Thank you William for busting open the scandalous revelation that Starmer unfairly prosecuted some very bad people. It is duly noted.williamglenn said:A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/18035233165123339781 -
Tired of this woke pc 1984 bsFrancisUrquhart said:
And they got community noted with claims of "murder".williamglenn said:A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/1803523316512333978
Whats next you can’t say mao murdered millions ?0 -
That twitter account has a rather unhealthy obsession with Starmer.0
-
I don't think the point is that it gives the landlord more security, I think it's that it gives them a higher return to compensate for their (perceived) higher risk.mwadams said:
I don't know what your rent is, but an extra £50 a month doesn't sound like it gives the landlord any meaningful extra security if you suddenly can't make the rent - it sounds like an excuse to stiff you for an extra.£50/month.carnforth said:
As someone who had to offer £50 per month extra to persuade a jittery landlord that it was ok to rent to a self employed person, I value the flexibility. If the price were fixed, I would simply have been denied.mwadams said:
Wouldn't you just do something like require rentals to have an advertised price? You can still pick which tenant you want, and discount down if you like. But you can't ratchet it up. It doesn't stop prices going up (you just raise the advertised price) but it is more transparent.FrancisUrquhart said:
This appears to be Starmer's solution to lots of things. Have a new quango regulator and nanny state stuff....and he can do this because the Tories have been proposing similar BS.MikeL said:If Starmer is going to have some regulator telling landlords which prospective tenant they have to choose then many landlords will say "No thanks" and just sell up.
OK, it may push house prices down a bit. But it will leave a situation where if people aren't able to buy then they'll have no choice whatsoever other than to stay with Mum and Dad.0 -
The idea that 600k illegitimate postal ballots for "remain" is 100% batshit bullshit.Nigelb said:.
The CW story in 2009 was an excellent example of good journalism, and made a strong prima facie case for Post Office shenanigans.LostPassword said:
Look. People use shorthands all the time, because they are quick and efficient. Explaining, in detail, why each individual conspiracy theory is complete and utter cobblers is time-consuming, annoying and pointless - because the true believers just don't want to know.Tweedledee said:
There's nothing more logically vacuous than dismissing a theory as a conspiracy theory. The implication is that it is unthinkable and historically unknown for a lot of people to do a bad thing and conspire to cover it up. As in Hur Hur, are you really claiming that a bunch of highly respected establishment figures including numerous distinguished lawyers and headed by a vicar, conspired to put literally hundreds of innocent people in jail? Hur Hur.Farooq said:
You really need to be careful about going down this conspiracy theory route. We in Scotland have had a couple of years head start after the 2014 referendum when idiotic tales were going round that you should use a pen instead of a pencil because the "security services" will erase your Yes vote and replace it with a No vote.MisterBedfordshire said:
Thanks.Farooq said:
I got that wrong, and I apologise.MisterBedfordshire said:
Charming. Especially, given that I did no such thing.Farooq said:
Oh, this nonsense reminds me that I never got around to telling you to fuck off for calling for people to be drowned.MisterBedfordshire said:I heard an interesting conspiracy theory a couple of years ago about the Brexit referendum that allegedly originated with mail workers.
It was that the general shock from the top politicians when the result came in was because the spooks had seen to it that a large amount of remain postal ballots had been inserted into the system (much easier to do with a national referendum than 650 constituencies) to make sure of the result - and despite this they still lost.
So, er, fuck off.
There, glad I got that off my chest.
Your conspiracy theory is still nonsense.
In the cold light of day I could have worded it better but appreciate your comment.
Yes it probably is nonsense but amusing nonetheless to think of the security services trying to be James Bond and ending up being Basildon Bond.
This is the stock in trade of those who want to undermine out democracy by undermining our faith in democracy. For example, Russia. They put these stories about to harm us.
The same story about pens went about in 2016 at the EU referendum, and a few of us up here were "aye, right, we've seen this one before". Since then all kinds of crap has been said and amplified. They spread because they're interesting, but before forwarding them you should ask whether you have any evidence and whether spreading a false rumour of this nature can be harmful. If the answers are "no" and "yes", please exercise restraint and keep it to yourself. We, and our democracy, have enemies. Don't do their work for them.
The triumph of the conspiracy theory theory was in the second world war, when reports of the shoah were largely discounted because Hur Hur we had this last time round with Belgian atrocities, you always get this exaggerated nonsense in time of war. Ignore.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how stupid supports evil. If you think a thesis is wrong attack it with evidence, not with a useless heuristic about "conspiracy theories."
So it makes sense to use a shorthand, then anyone who hasn't fallen all the way down the rabbit hole is prompted to consider the issue for a moment themselves and consider the available evidence, instead of wasting your time putting together a detailed case that will be dismissed by someone going, "Yeah, but, that's what they said about..."
And I was convinced by the evidence about Horizon as soon as Private Eye started reporting about it - long before the vicar became involved, so you can take that one and shove it up your arse.
Is there a shred of evidence for this 'ballot stuffing' tale ?4 -
Half of it is pure trolling, interspersed with the rare fair criticism of Starmer to make the account appear more legitimateFrancisUrquhart said:That twitter account has a rather unhealthy obsession with Starmer.
0 -
In Liechtenstein, current court case regarding the right of a designated deputy member of parliament - selected by elected MPs for each party, to fill vacancies that may arise in that party's contingent until the next election - to continue as a deputy IF they leave their party.Richard_Tyndall said:
But the MP has the absolute right to decide to abandon the party if he disagrees with the direction of travel.bondegezou said:
Under FPTP, parties still have the power of picking the candidate.Richard_Tyndall said:
Any for of electoral system that makes it explicitely about the parties is worse than what we have now. At least here we make an effort to say it is about the individual candidates and some of us still vote on that basis. Most PR systems give more power to the parties at a time when we should be doing the exact oposite and trying to reduce the power of parties in our democracy.Nigelb said:
'Illegitimate' is a very poor choice of words - and it's beyond rich for the Tories to criticise a system which has benefitted them for so long, as soon as its effects turn against them.LostPassword said:
When I was criticising the right for pushing the idea that the next Labour government would be illegitimate because of its super-massive majority, I was not necessarily including you in that (it can be hard to keep track of every poster's political position), but more commenting on the many interventions to that effect from Conservative politicians and commentators.darkage said:I must correct the characterisation that I am on 'the right'. I have said several times that I am voting for Labour. I have however made a prediction that the next political movement in the UK will be on what people describe as the 'far right'. This is not something I want to happen, I just think it will, because of the likely failure of 'centrism' to take in to account opposing views on matters like immigration and cultural issues, views which a lot of people hold. This, and the fact of 'reactive dynamics', together with other global political shifts, mean that it seems very likely to me that people will start to look to the 'far right' for answers, as the 'left' has run out of road. The concern expressed in the last comment was that, if we have a situation where 40% of people vote for right wing parties, and these positions are barely represented in Parliament, then the situation starts to become worrying for democracy. The reaction to this point is quite revealing, it is just something that people have to just 'suck up'...
I have said before that the best model for dealing with the 'far right' is what has happened in Finland for the last 20 years, the people involved are bought in to the system, and it is somehow made to work.
But the criticism of FPTP is entirely correct.
It's better than no democracy at all, but it's a half arsed, often unfair version of democracy.
I would have been extremely happy if AV had won out but of course the Lib Dems had a tantrum over it.
I am not defending the current situation under FPTP. I am saying that it is bad as the parties have too much power but that PR based on party share will make it worse. It will provide the parties with a moral right within the democratic system.
Might be relevant, especially as UK and Liechtenstein share the same tune for their national anthems.1 -
It goes without saying of course that the background of a person shouldn't be taken into account when prosecuting them, and deciding on a sentence if they're found guilty. This twitter account implies that it should be.Mexicanpete said:
Thank you William for busting open the scandalous revelation that Starmer unfairly prosecuted some very bad people. It is duly noted.williamglenn said:A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/18035233165123339780 -
Malaysia uses FPTP and has an anti-party hopping law. If you leave (or are thrown out) of the party that you stood for in the election then your seat is declared vacant and there is a by-election. The reason for that law is less to do with an MP's conscious but more to do with the lure of money that toppled a previous government. At least one party insists on prospective candidates signing a contract that they will pay 10M MYR in compensation to that party should they leave it after being elected.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
In Liechtenstein, current court case regarding the right of a designated deputy member of parliament - selected by elected MPs for each party, to fill vacancies that may arise in that party's contingent until the next election - to continue as a deputy IF they leave their party.Richard_Tyndall said:
But the MP has the absolute right to decide to abandon the party if he disagrees with the direction of travel.bondegezou said:
Under FPTP, parties still have the power of picking the candidate.Richard_Tyndall said:
Any for of electoral system that makes it explicitely about the parties is worse than what we have now. At least here we make an effort to say it is about the individual candidates and some of us still vote on that basis. Most PR systems give more power to the parties at a time when we should be doing the exact oposite and trying to reduce the power of parties in our democracy.Nigelb said:
'Illegitimate' is a very poor choice of words - and it's beyond rich for the Tories to criticise a system which has benefitted them for so long, as soon as its effects turn against them.LostPassword said:
When I was criticising the right for pushing the idea that the next Labour government would be illegitimate because of its super-massive majority, I was not necessarily including you in that (it can be hard to keep track of every poster's political position), but more commenting on the many interventions to that effect from Conservative politicians and commentators.darkage said:I must correct the characterisation that I am on 'the right'. I have said several times that I am voting for Labour. I have however made a prediction that the next political movement in the UK will be on what people describe as the 'far right'. This is not something I want to happen, I just think it will, because of the likely failure of 'centrism' to take in to account opposing views on matters like immigration and cultural issues, views which a lot of people hold. This, and the fact of 'reactive dynamics', together with other global political shifts, mean that it seems very likely to me that people will start to look to the 'far right' for answers, as the 'left' has run out of road. The concern expressed in the last comment was that, if we have a situation where 40% of people vote for right wing parties, and these positions are barely represented in Parliament, then the situation starts to become worrying for democracy. The reaction to this point is quite revealing, it is just something that people have to just 'suck up'...
I have said before that the best model for dealing with the 'far right' is what has happened in Finland for the last 20 years, the people involved are bought in to the system, and it is somehow made to work.
But the criticism of FPTP is entirely correct.
It's better than no democracy at all, but it's a half arsed, often unfair version of democracy.
I would have been extremely happy if AV had won out but of course the Lib Dems had a tantrum over it.
I am not defending the current situation under FPTP. I am saying that it is bad as the parties have too much power but that PR based on party share will make it worse. It will provide the parties with a moral right within the democratic system.
Might be relevant, especially as UK and Liechtenstein share the same tune for their national anthems.
1 -
Japan also has an anti-party-hopping law, in addition to which a lot of people want to party-hop because the Senate uses Single Non-Transferable Vote where if a party fields too many candidates they split their own vote, so incumbents will be deselected in advance of the election and their only hope is to run for another party. The loophole is that although you can't move from one party to another, you can form a new party. So before every election there's a "realignment" where one of the minor parties gets formally dissolved and replaced by a new party.Ally_B1 said:
Malaysia uses FPTP and has an anti-party hopping law. If you leave (or are thrown out) of the party that you stood for in the election then your seat is declared vacant and there is a by-election. The reason for that law is less to do with an MP's conscious but more to do with the lure of money that toppled a previous government. At least one party insists on prospective candidates signing a contract that they will pay 10M MYR in compensation to that party should they leave it after being elected.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
In Liechtenstein, current court case regarding the right of a designated deputy member of parliament - selected by elected MPs for each party, to fill vacancies that may arise in that party's contingent until the next election - to continue as a deputy IF they leave their party.Richard_Tyndall said:
But the MP has the absolute right to decide to abandon the party if he disagrees with the direction of travel.bondegezou said:
Under FPTP, parties still have the power of picking the candidate.Richard_Tyndall said:
Any for of electoral system that makes it explicitely about the parties is worse than what we have now. At least here we make an effort to say it is about the individual candidates and some of us still vote on that basis. Most PR systems give more power to the parties at a time when we should be doing the exact oposite and trying to reduce the power of parties in our democracy.Nigelb said:
'Illegitimate' is a very poor choice of words - and it's beyond rich for the Tories to criticise a system which has benefitted them for so long, as soon as its effects turn against them.LostPassword said:
When I was criticising the right for pushing the idea that the next Labour government would be illegitimate because of its super-massive majority, I was not necessarily including you in that (it can be hard to keep track of every poster's political position), but more commenting on the many interventions to that effect from Conservative politicians and commentators.darkage said:I must correct the characterisation that I am on 'the right'. I have said several times that I am voting for Labour. I have however made a prediction that the next political movement in the UK will be on what people describe as the 'far right'. This is not something I want to happen, I just think it will, because of the likely failure of 'centrism' to take in to account opposing views on matters like immigration and cultural issues, views which a lot of people hold. This, and the fact of 'reactive dynamics', together with other global political shifts, mean that it seems very likely to me that people will start to look to the 'far right' for answers, as the 'left' has run out of road. The concern expressed in the last comment was that, if we have a situation where 40% of people vote for right wing parties, and these positions are barely represented in Parliament, then the situation starts to become worrying for democracy. The reaction to this point is quite revealing, it is just something that people have to just 'suck up'...
I have said before that the best model for dealing with the 'far right' is what has happened in Finland for the last 20 years, the people involved are bought in to the system, and it is somehow made to work.
But the criticism of FPTP is entirely correct.
It's better than no democracy at all, but it's a half arsed, often unfair version of democracy.
I would have been extremely happy if AV had won out but of course the Lib Dems had a tantrum over it.
I am not defending the current situation under FPTP. I am saying that it is bad as the parties have too much power but that PR based on party share will make it worse. It will provide the parties with a moral right within the democratic system.
Might be relevant, especially as UK and Liechtenstein share the same tune for their national anthems.0 -
Donald Trump's presidential campaign has received $50m (£39.5m) boost from the conservative billionaire Timothy Mellon, a federal filing showed on Thursday.
The Super-Pac fund called "MAGA Inc" disclosed to the Federal Election Commission that it took in more than $68m from donors last month.0 -
On careful consideration of the years of evidence, no, it won’t.Cicero said:
Oh God, will this narcissistic twattery never cease? Considering you are a late boomer, you really might as well be 5.Leon said:
Sorry. @cicero and @TSE have told me not to mention any of this, apologies. Blame themTweedledee said:
https://www.kelpcanteen.com/Leon said:
You want me to mention it in a piece for the gazette or whoever? I can do that. DM meTweedledee said:
Personal requestLeon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
There's a little caravan on Custom House Quay in Falmouth knocking out river Fal oysters at 4 for a tenner. It's important for my wellbeing that this place stays in business, so please patronise it. That is all.
These guys, and my only interest is I want to be able to keep on eating their oysters when I am in Falmouth. So yes a heads up in the gazette would be awesome.0 -
London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o0 -
Sounds like Trump has some big legal bills that need paying by his Super-Pac...FrancisUrquhart said:Donald Trump's presidential campaign has received $50m (£39.5m) boost from the conservative billionaire Timothy Mellon, a federal filing showed on Thursday.
The Super-Pac fund called "MAGA Inc" disclosed to the Federal Election Commission that it took in more than $68m from donors last month.0 -
Trump and lawyers, unheard of.MarqueeMark said:
Sounds like Trump has some big legal bills that need paying by his Super-Pac...FrancisUrquhart said:Donald Trump's presidential campaign has received $50m (£39.5m) boost from the conservative billionaire Timothy Mellon, a federal filing showed on Thursday.
The Super-Pac fund called "MAGA Inc" disclosed to the Federal Election Commission that it took in more than $68m from donors last month.0 -
Why isn't security better?FrancisUrquhart said:London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o0 -
If you've got an organization with 1.5 million employees handling data on maybe 50 million people, you're going to leak some of it.Andy_JS said:
Why isn't security better?FrancisUrquhart said:London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o0 -
I think the tweet series enhances not diminishes SKS.williamglenn said:A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/18035233165123339782 -
That is exactly what I thought when I saw it and rooted around a bit before I posted to check that it is a Genuine Tory Video.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
5.6 million views so far.
(The video is of someone raking a beach and laying a red carpet down to the sea with the words "Welcome" written in the sand with a subtitle saying "Labours approach to Illegal immigration"
Rather amusing that pompous centrist Tories are voting Tory instead of Libdem to keep Reform out when their own party is putting out stuff like this).0 -
Security costs - especially to get people who know what they're doing. Institutional culture also matters - people need to follow processes and not e @sshats with data.Andy_JS said:
Why isn't security better?FrancisUrquhart said:London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o
But there are always zero-day attacks, and sometimes hackers can get lucky.
It is believed this attack came from Russia. For those fearing a war with Russia: we are already at war with Russia...
1 -
Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)0 -
According to the linked story it was a private contractor that was hacked.edmundintokyo said:
If you've got an organization with 1.5 million employees handling data on maybe 50 million people, you're going to leak some of it.Andy_JS said:
Why isn't security better?FrancisUrquhart said:London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o0 -
People are the weakest link in data security.JosiasJessop said:
Security costs - especially to get people who know what they're doing. Institutional culture also matters - people need to follow processes and not e @sshats with data.Andy_JS said:
Why isn't security better?FrancisUrquhart said:London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o
But there are always zero-day attacks, and sometimes hackers can get lucky.
It is believed this attack came from Russia. For those fearing a war with Russia: we are already at war with Russia...2 -
Canadian and other Western academics are helping Iran and China develop drone technology.Nigelb said:Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/18036735746804820660 -
His argument is not stupid. The article says that 75% of small drones are already being lost over the battlefield, with immature EW systems to counter them. EW systems will improve.Nigelb said:Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)
There is a battle going on between small drones - particularly PFV ones - and counter systems. It is not 'stupid' to suggest that the counter systems may win. Though personally I think, as often occurs, weapon and counter-weapon will evolve.
But here's the thing: these drones are effective because they are cheap. The more robust you make them against EW or other weapons, the more expensive and larger they become. And their advantage comes from being able to be fielded in large quantities.1 -
The replies are a real pincer movement and show why the Tories polling is so awfulMisterBedfordshire said:
That is exactly what I thought when I saw it and rooted around a bit before I posted to check that it is a Genuine Tory Video.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
5.6 million views so far.
(The video is of someone raking a beach and laying a red carpet down to the sea with the words "Welcome" written in the sand with a subtitle saying "Labours approach to Illegal immigration"
Rather amusing that pompous centrist Tories are voting Tory instead of Libdem to keep Reform out when their own party is putting out stuff like this).
0 -
The problem is that the obvious step to make drones less vulnerable is to make them autonomous.JosiasJessop said:
His argument is not stupid. The article says that 75% of small drones are already being lost over the battlefield, with immature EW systems to counter them. EW systems will improve.Nigelb said:Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)
There is a battle going on between small drones - particularly PFV ones - and counter systems. It is not 'stupid' to suggest that the counter systems may win. Though personally I think, as often occurs, weapon and counter-weapon will evolve.
But here's the thing: these drones are effective because they are cheap. The more robust you make them against EW or other weapons, the more expensive and larger they become. And their advantage comes from being able to be fielded in large quantities.
Where's Sarah Connor when we need her?1 -
No. It is way beyond 100% batshit bullshit. It is the kind of stuff that Trump drops from his speeches because it is too embarrassingly stupid. For him.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
The idea that 600k illegitimate postal ballots for "remain" is 100% batshit bullshit.Nigelb said:.
The CW story in 2009 was an excellent example of good journalism, and made a strong prima facie case for Post Office shenanigans.LostPassword said:
Look. People use shorthands all the time, because they are quick and efficient. Explaining, in detail, why each individual conspiracy theory is complete and utter cobblers is time-consuming, annoying and pointless - because the true believers just don't want to know.Tweedledee said:
There's nothing more logically vacuous than dismissing a theory as a conspiracy theory. The implication is that it is unthinkable and historically unknown for a lot of people to do a bad thing and conspire to cover it up. As in Hur Hur, are you really claiming that a bunch of highly respected establishment figures including numerous distinguished lawyers and headed by a vicar, conspired to put literally hundreds of innocent people in jail? Hur Hur.Farooq said:
You really need to be careful about going down this conspiracy theory route. We in Scotland have had a couple of years head start after the 2014 referendum when idiotic tales were going round that you should use a pen instead of a pencil because the "security services" will erase your Yes vote and replace it with a No vote.MisterBedfordshire said:
Thanks.Farooq said:
I got that wrong, and I apologise.MisterBedfordshire said:
Charming. Especially, given that I did no such thing.Farooq said:
Oh, this nonsense reminds me that I never got around to telling you to fuck off for calling for people to be drowned.MisterBedfordshire said:I heard an interesting conspiracy theory a couple of years ago about the Brexit referendum that allegedly originated with mail workers.
It was that the general shock from the top politicians when the result came in was because the spooks had seen to it that a large amount of remain postal ballots had been inserted into the system (much easier to do with a national referendum than 650 constituencies) to make sure of the result - and despite this they still lost.
So, er, fuck off.
There, glad I got that off my chest.
Your conspiracy theory is still nonsense.
In the cold light of day I could have worded it better but appreciate your comment.
Yes it probably is nonsense but amusing nonetheless to think of the security services trying to be James Bond and ending up being Basildon Bond.
This is the stock in trade of those who want to undermine out democracy by undermining our faith in democracy. For example, Russia. They put these stories about to harm us.
The same story about pens went about in 2016 at the EU referendum, and a few of us up here were "aye, right, we've seen this one before". Since then all kinds of crap has been said and amplified. They spread because they're interesting, but before forwarding them you should ask whether you have any evidence and whether spreading a false rumour of this nature can be harmful. If the answers are "no" and "yes", please exercise restraint and keep it to yourself. We, and our democracy, have enemies. Don't do their work for them.
The triumph of the conspiracy theory theory was in the second world war, when reports of the shoah were largely discounted because Hur Hur we had this last time round with Belgian atrocities, you always get this exaggerated nonsense in time of war. Ignore.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how stupid supports evil. If you think a thesis is wrong attack it with evidence, not with a useless heuristic about "conspiracy theories."
So it makes sense to use a shorthand, then anyone who hasn't fallen all the way down the rabbit hole is prompted to consider the issue for a moment themselves and consider the available evidence, instead of wasting your time putting together a detailed case that will be dismissed by someone going, "Yeah, but, that's what they said about..."
And I was convinced by the evidence about Horizon as soon as Private Eye started reporting about it - long before the vicar became involved, so you can take that one and shove it up your arse.
Is there a shred of evidence for this 'ballot stuffing' tale ?3 -
That may make them less vulnerable, but it does not make them invulnerable. And if being autonomous means reduced accuracy, then that really matters, as their payloads are really small. If your small drone has a warhead capable of killing something within two metres, and it's CEP reduced from a few centimetres (because it is being flown by a human) to twenty metres, then it becomes largely ineffective.Foxy said:
The problem is that the obvious step to make drones less vulnerable is to make them autonomous.JosiasJessop said:
His argument is not stupid. The article says that 75% of small drones are already being lost over the battlefield, with immature EW systems to counter them. EW systems will improve.Nigelb said:Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)
There is a battle going on between small drones - particularly PFV ones - and counter systems. It is not 'stupid' to suggest that the counter systems may win. Though personally I think, as often occurs, weapon and counter-weapon will evolve.
But here's the thing: these drones are effective because they are cheap. The more robust you make them against EW or other weapons, the more expensive and larger they become. And their advantage comes from being able to be fielded in large quantities.
Where's Sarah Connor when we need her?
(CEP: Circle Error Probability: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable )0 -
Conspiracies exist. From a couple of execs agreeing to put a lunch on expenses to Nixon trying to cover up Watergate to a knowledgable couple putting a few quid on advance knowledge of an election date. Millions of little conspiracies. But the bigger the conspiracy gets the less likely it is to keep under wraps. The idea that more than half a million pieces of paper were printed and completed for Remain (by hand to preserve the illusion) and inserted into the postal system, somehow, with no one noticing is logically moronic. If the “deep state” wanted to fix the result there were far easier ways to have done it.Malmesbury said:
No. It is way beyond 100% batshit bullshit. It is the kind of stuff that Trump drops from his speeches because it is too embarrassingly stupid. For him.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
The idea that 600k illegitimate postal ballots for "remain" is 100% batshit bullshit.Nigelb said:.
The CW story in 2009 was an excellent example of good journalism, and made a strong prima facie case for Post Office shenanigans.LostPassword said:
Look. People use shorthands all the time, because they are quick and efficient. Explaining, in detail, why each individual conspiracy theory is complete and utter cobblers is time-consuming, annoying and pointless - because the true believers just don't want to know.Tweedledee said:
There's nothing more logically vacuous than dismissing a theory as a conspiracy theory. The implication is that it is unthinkable and historically unknown for a lot of people to do a bad thing and conspire to cover it up. As in Hur Hur, are you really claiming that a bunch of highly respected establishment figures including numerous distinguished lawyers and headed by a vicar, conspired to put literally hundreds of innocent people in jail? Hur Hur.Farooq said:
You really need to be careful about going down this conspiracy theory route. We in Scotland have had a couple of years head start after the 2014 referendum when idiotic tales were going round that you should use a pen instead of a pencil because the "security services" will erase your Yes vote and replace it with a No vote.MisterBedfordshire said:
Thanks.Farooq said:
I got that wrong, and I apologise.MisterBedfordshire said:
Charming. Especially, given that I did no such thing.Farooq said:
Oh, this nonsense reminds me that I never got around to telling you to fuck off for calling for people to be drowned.MisterBedfordshire said:I heard an interesting conspiracy theory a couple of years ago about the Brexit referendum that allegedly originated with mail workers.
It was that the general shock from the top politicians when the result came in was because the spooks had seen to it that a large amount of remain postal ballots had been inserted into the system (much easier to do with a national referendum than 650 constituencies) to make sure of the result - and despite this they still lost.
So, er, fuck off.
There, glad I got that off my chest.
Your conspiracy theory is still nonsense.
In the cold light of day I could have worded it better but appreciate your comment.
Yes it probably is nonsense but amusing nonetheless to think of the security services trying to be James Bond and ending up being Basildon Bond.
This is the stock in trade of those who want to undermine out democracy by undermining our faith in democracy. For example, Russia. They put these stories about to harm us.
The same story about pens went about in 2016 at the EU referendum, and a few of us up here were "aye, right, we've seen this one before". Since then all kinds of crap has been said and amplified. They spread because they're interesting, but before forwarding them you should ask whether you have any evidence and whether spreading a false rumour of this nature can be harmful. If the answers are "no" and "yes", please exercise restraint and keep it to yourself. We, and our democracy, have enemies. Don't do their work for them.
The triumph of the conspiracy theory theory was in the second world war, when reports of the shoah were largely discounted because Hur Hur we had this last time round with Belgian atrocities, you always get this exaggerated nonsense in time of war. Ignore.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how stupid supports evil. If you think a thesis is wrong attack it with evidence, not with a useless heuristic about "conspiracy theories."
So it makes sense to use a shorthand, then anyone who hasn't fallen all the way down the rabbit hole is prompted to consider the issue for a moment themselves and consider the available evidence, instead of wasting your time putting together a detailed case that will be dismissed by someone going, "Yeah, but, that's what they said about..."
And I was convinced by the evidence about Horizon as soon as Private Eye started reporting about it - long before the vicar became involved, so you can take that one and shove it up your arse.
Is there a shred of evidence for this 'ballot stuffing' tale ?
It’s like the Diana conspiracy theories which posit a plot that could have been thwarted by the use of a seat belt by the victim. Falls apart under any level of analysis.3 -
South East Cornwall is still relatively off the beaten track. We spend a fortnight at Whitsand Bay most summers, it's completely idyllic.Chameleon said:
The SW is ridiculously good for food - for the price of a bottle of wine and a meal in London Pizza Express I got a One Michelin star level banquet + wine at the Sardine Factory in Looe (filming site of Beyond Paradise - currently bib gourmand - deputy head chef is a Master Chef professional Finalist and in his early 20s). SE Cornwall is one of the most neglected areas of the country relative to the rest of county but every time I've gone has been amazing.Tweedledee said:
Personal requestLeon said:Ok maybe life in Britain isn’t SO bad
There's a little caravan on Custom House Quay in Falmouth knocking out river Fal oysters at 4 for a tenner. It's important for my wellbeing that this place stays in business, so please patronise it. That is all.
Ask for the pickled mussels off-menu, they always have them and they are one of the best things I have ever had, even as someone repelled by the description.0 -
Yup. The previous argument against hobby drones was that EW plus defence systems modified from active defence systems for tanks would make them ineffective, very rapidly.JosiasJessop said:
His argument is not stupid. The article says that 75% of small drones are already being lost over the battlefield, with immature EW systems to counter them. EW systems will improve.Nigelb said:Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)
There is a battle going on between small drones - particularly PFV ones - and counter systems. It is not 'stupid' to suggest that the counter systems may win. Though personally I think, as often occurs, weapon and counter-weapon will evolve.
But here's the thing: these drones are effective because they are cheap. The more robust you make them against EW or other weapons, the more expensive and larger they become. And their advantage comes from being able to be fielded in large quantities.
They’ve worked in Ukraine because the counter electronics and point defences require a level of tech above simple homebuild.0 -
In Scotland you can have all 4 seasons in one day!Foxy said:
I like having different seasons. Hoar frost, snow, solemn November greyness, the whiff of autumn in September, the freshness and greenest of Spring.turbotubbs said:
Yep, hands up I love the snow and cold. But there are plenty who chase the summer warmth too. I think we are pretty lucky in the U.K. to have pretty decent seasons, albeit I am sad at the influence of climate change on U.K. winters.TimS said:
You are of course one of the PBers who is also a weather geek, like me.turbotubbs said:
Pulling the curtains, lighting the fire and engaging in your own form of nesting, love it.eristdoof said:
Autumn is far from "Best of all". Drizzle, winter jackets taken out of the wardrobe to be used every day for the next 5 months, humidity jumps through the roof, central heating turned on. No more evenings outside at the pub ... and term starts again. The only savng grace is colourful leaves and it not being as cold as January!algarkirk said:
You have to bank the plusses that you can. On 21st December I tell myself it's all getting better for the next 6 months. Great. On 21st June I tell myself that summer is not over till at least well into September and there is 3 months to go. And then, I say, autumn is often the best of all. And then it's December again. Snowdrops...and so it goes on.SandyRentool said:
So the nights are drawing in. Wonderful.Pulpstar said:9 minutes past the solstice. Start of astronomical summer 🌞🌞
It's always surprised me how many weather geeks - almost certainly a majority - love cold weather and particularly snow. They go mad for it. I've been a contributor to weather forums for a couple of decades now and my activity seems to be the inverse of most: I am most interested in summer weather, heatwaves and thunderstorms, and couldn't care less about winter.
It's variety that makes our climate so interesting.0 -
I can't really be bothered about what at most is a few thousand in betting wins.
However suspending procurement processes then awarding £bns in contracts to associates for non-compliant PPE in a national crisis, I'd like to see the culprits in prison and their assets seized as proceeds of crime.1 -
Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.1 -
He says he's left-wing, but the account was created in April 2024, so would seem to have been created solely with the purpose of chatting shit about Starmer and spreading other bollocks for this election.williamglenn said:A left wing Twitter account is trying to attack Starmer for his role in prosecuting London rioters in 2011 in super quick time.
https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/1803523316512333978
Though everything they've posted seems to be information that's already in the public domain, or a matter of opinion, as opposed to being made up, so it's in the upper tier of twitter accounts despite that.
Righties on here have pointed to the response to the riot in 2011 as a model to follow, but have otherwise been very critical of Keir Starmer. There can't be many British PMs who have come to office with as notable a track record in getting things done, though it's hard to square such decisive action with the timid figure that Starmer often cuts as Labour leader.0 -
https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-no-bombshell-on-covid-19-origins-u-s-intelligence-rebuts-claims-about-sick-lab-workers/Leon said:
Lab Leak was dismissed - by all of "the science", including the Lancet, in a now provably fraudulent letter - as "a racist conspiracy theory". As such we were literally banned from talking about it for a year, even as a concept, on Twitter and Facebook - largely at the behest of the Biden administration, to an extent where it actually troubled Nick CleggFarooq said:
Listen up, stupid fuck. The starting point is that extraordinary claims require evidence. You think there are conspiracies to steal elections in this country? Put up some evidence. Asking people to come up with evidence that something DIDN'T happen is -- and you should stop for a moment here to think about how obvious this is -- witless.Tweedledee said:
There's nothing more logically vacuous than dismissing a theory as a conspiracy theory. The implication is that it is unthinkable and historically unknown for a lot of people to do a bad thing and conspire to cover it up. As in Hur Hur, are you really claiming that a bunch of highly respected establishment figures including numerous distinguished lawyers and headed by a vicar, conspired to put literally hundreds of innocent people in jail? Hur Hur.Farooq said:
You really need to be careful about going down this conspiracy theory route. We in Scotland have had a couple of years head start after the 2014 referendum when idiotic tales were going round that you should use a pen instead of a pencil because the "security services" will erase your Yes vote and replace it with a No vote.MisterBedfordshire said:
Thanks.Farooq said:
I got that wrong, and I apologise.MisterBedfordshire said:
Charming. Especially, given that I did no such thing.Farooq said:
Oh, this nonsense reminds me that I never got around to telling you to fuck off for calling for people to be drowned.MisterBedfordshire said:I heard an interesting conspiracy theory a couple of years ago about the Brexit referendum that allegedly originated with mail workers.
It was that the general shock from the top politicians when the result came in was because the spooks had seen to it that a large amount of remain postal ballots had been inserted into the system (much easier to do with a national referendum than 650 constituencies) to make sure of the result - and despite this they still lost.
So, er, fuck off.
There, glad I got that off my chest.
Your conspiracy theory is still nonsense.
In the cold light of day I could have worded it better but appreciate your comment.
Yes it probably is nonsense but amusing nonetheless to think of the security services trying to be James Bond and ending up being Basildon Bond.
This is the stock in trade of those who want to undermine out democracy by undermining our faith in democracy. For example, Russia. They put these stories about to harm us.
The same story about pens went about in 2016 at the EU referendum, and a few of us up here were "aye, right, we've seen this one before". Since then all kinds of crap has been said and amplified. They spread because they're interesting, but before forwarding them you should ask whether you have any evidence and whether spreading a false rumour of this nature can be harmful. If the answers are "no" and "yes", please exercise restraint and keep it to yourself. We, and our democracy, have enemies. Don't do their work for them.
The triumph of the conspiracy theory theory was in the second world war, when reports of the shoah were largely discounted because Hur Hur we had this last time round with Belgian atrocities, you always get this exaggerated nonsense in time of war. Ignore.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how stupid supports evil. If you think a thesis is wrong attack it with evidence, not with a useless heuristic about "conspiracy theories."
Now, given that I also made a claim, that Russia attempts to interfere with Western politics through disinformation and that we all need to be on guard for this, it's only fair I direct you to some evidence for that.
USA:
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/senate-intel-committee-releases-bipartisan-report-russia’s-use-social-media
UK:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-exposes-attempted-russian-cyber-interference-in-politics-and-democratic-processes
Germany:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/26/germany-unearths-pro-russia-disinformation-campaign-on-x
These a metric fucktonne of this stuff if you want to gorge yourself silly.
Now, go back and think about the claims that started this... MI5 or whoever fiddled some vote here. Where's the evidence? Oh, you don't have any? THAT is why it's a conspiracy theory. Moron.
Now it turns out Lab Leak is almost certainly true1 -
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..2 -
It's morally reprehensible for this sort of thing to be happening without the Supreme Court also ruling that we shouldn't be allowed to buy cars etc.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.0 -
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..3 -
I can be very bothered about a few thousand in betting wins - because it's that type of behaviour that explains everything else.Dopermean said:I can't really be bothered about what at most is a few thousand in betting wins.
However suspending procurement processes then awarding £bns in contracts to associates for non-compliant PPE in a national crisis, I'd like to see the culprits in prison and their assets seized as proceeds of crime.3 -
If it's unexpected, what can the politicians do?eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..0 -
You make a good case for how the law might work.Gallowgate said:
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..1 -
1. Blame judges, especially if they can foreign onestlg86 said:
If it's unexpected, what can the politicians do?eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..
2. Alternatively, legislate (with clarity and thought).0 -
For what it’s worth, this result was not entirely unexpected to lawyers.
Primary legislation to “fix it” (if you think it’s broken). Luckily Keir Starmer being a lawyer will understand this.
From a purely professional perspective most of the laws drafted in the last 10 years or so have been grade A dogshit so I am hoping that improves.3 -
It didn't take into account the additional emissions generated by the imported oil and gas the well's produce would have displaced either.tlg86 said:
It's morally reprehensible for this sort of thing to be happening without the Supreme Court also ruling that we shouldn't be allowed to buy cars etc.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.0 -
Did the Supreme Court account for the extra CO2 emitted because of the extra oil that will have to be imported if they stopped this development?1
-
No because the case wasn’t about that. It was about the considerations Surrey County Council, as a public authority, should have had when deciding a PLANNING PERMISSION application.tlg86 said:Did the Supreme Court account for the extra CO2 emitted because of the extra oil that will have to be imported if they stopped this development?
0 -
Whether a new oil well can proceed legally is a matter for parliament and the appropriate local authorities. It is a complete abuse of "supreme court" powers to intervene on these spurious grounds, effectively to prevent any new oil wells being built in this country - economical self-harm which is for elected parliamentarians to inflict if they so wish, because they can be de-elected again. It's not for an appointed body to stretch its remit and make decisions like this.Gallowgate said:
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..0 -
This comment should have been in response to the car comment.Gallowgate said:
No because the case wasn’t about that. It was about the considerations Surrey County Council, as a public authority, should have had when deciding a PLANNING PERMISSION application.tlg86 said:Did the Supreme Court account for the extra CO2 emitted because of the extra oil that will have to be imported if they stopped this development?
I would be surprised if the lawyers didn’t advance that argument so it was probably considered.0 -
It’s a procedural issue, surely. If the county was supposed to have considered it, they should have considered it. The Supreme Court is not ruling on the merits of the application, but how it was assessed.tlg86 said:Did the Supreme Court account for the extra CO2 emitted because of the extra oil that will have to be imported if they stopped this development?
5 -
Eh?MisterBedfordshire said:
That is exactly what I thought when I saw it and rooted around a bit before I posted to check that it is a Genuine Tory Video.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
5.6 million views so far.
(The video is of someone raking a beach and laying a red carpet down to the sea with the words "Welcome" written in the sand with a subtitle saying "Labours approach to Illegal immigration"
Rather amusing that pompous centrist Tories are voting Tory instead of Libdem to keep Reform out when their own party is putting out stuff like this).
The pompous centrist Tories buggered off to Lib and Lab ages ago, in part because of stuff like this.0 -
Mate you haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about. Judicial review of public authority decisions has always been part of our constitution. Blame politicians for drafting shit laws. It is politicians which set out the procedural and powers frameworks that public authorities are required to follow. Surrey CC did not clearly.Luckyguy1983 said:
Whether a new oil well can proceed legally is a matter for parliament and the appropriate local authorities. It is a complete abuse of "supreme court" powers to intervene on these spurious grounds, effectively to prevent any new oil wells being built in this country - economical self-harm which is for elected parliamentarians to inflict if they so wish, because they can be de-elected again. It's not for an appointed body to stretch its remit and make decisions like this.Gallowgate said:
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..2 -
His argument is stupid.JosiasJessop said:
His argument is not stupid. The article says that 75% of small drones are already being lost over the battlefield, with immature EW systems to counter them. EW systems will improve.Nigelb said:Is the UK military as stupid as this ?
Small drones will soon lose combat advantage, French Army chief says
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/06/19/small-drones-will-soon-lose-combat-advantage-french-army-chief-says/
(No, they really won't.)
There is a battle going on between small drones - particularly PFV ones - and counter systems. It is not 'stupid' to suggest that the counter systems may win. Though personally I think, as often occurs, weapon and counter-weapon will evolve.
But here's the thing: these drones are effective because they are cheap. The more robust you make them against EW or other weapons, the more expensive and larger they become. And their advantage comes from being able to be fielded in large quantities.
First, drones are cheap and exisndabke. In the case of FPV attack drones, deliberately so. Even with a 90% attrition rates they'd be more cost effective e than any other battlefield weapon.
Second, the rare of development is far faster than that of systems to counter them. In an evolutionary arms rave, they have an advantage.
The general quoted in the story is attached to his armour program. Which is orders of magnitude more expensive, and has product cycles measured in decades rather than months.
I hope our military better absorbs the lessons from Ukraine.
2 -
They can intervene if the process was not followed properly. That’s a fundamental principle of the rule of law.Luckyguy1983 said:
Whether a new oil well can proceed legally is a matter for parliament and the appropriate local authorities. It is a complete abuse of "supreme court" powers to intervene on these spurious grounds, effectively to prevent any new oil wells being built in this country - economical self-harm which is for elected parliamentarians to inflict if they so wish, because they can be de-elected again. It's not for an appointed body to stretch its remit and make decisions like this.Gallowgate said:
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..4 -
Hence also the appeal of authoritarians, who can pretend they can avoid problems by setting aside democratic checks.Gallowgate said:
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..2 -
They'll prosecute the bets but not the PPE, they've spent £ms in legal fees in attempts to conceal entails of PPE contract awards. You should be even more bothered about the PPE.eek said:
I can be very bothered about a few thousand in betting wins - because it's that type of behaviour that explains everything else.Dopermean said:I can't really be bothered about what at most is a few thousand in betting wins.
However suspending procurement processes then awarding £bns in contracts to associates for non-compliant PPE in a national crisis, I'd like to see the culprits in prison and their assets seized as proceeds of crime.0 -
Bear in mind that to the few Tories who are still with them, Sunak is not a centre-right Brexiteer but a lefty big state remainer.Stuartinromford said:
Eh?MisterBedfordshire said:
That is exactly what I thought when I saw it and rooted around a bit before I posted to check that it is a Genuine Tory Video.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
5.6 million views so far.
(The video is of someone raking a beach and laying a red carpet down to the sea with the words "Welcome" written in the sand with a subtitle saying "Labours approach to Illegal immigration"
Rather amusing that pompous centrist Tories are voting Tory instead of Libdem to keep Reform out when their own party is putting out stuff like this).
The pompous centrist Tories buggered off to Lib and Lab ages ago, in part because of stuff like this.1 -
1) The politicians make a law saying “make us good”tlg86 said:
If it's unexpected, what can the politicians do?eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..
2) The Supreme Court rules that the law says “make us good” and it must be obeyed.
3) The politicians say WTAF?
Who are the idiots in this?
2 -
Why? I've never understood this "scandal".Dopermean said:I can't really be bothered about what at most is a few thousand in betting wins.
However suspending procurement processes then awarding £bns in contracts to associates for non-compliant PPE in a national crisis, I'd like to see the culprits in prison and their assets seized as proceeds of crime.
We were potentially in an apocalyptic position and we needed kit, vaccines and supplies - fast - even at the cost of inefficiency and inflated prices. The alternative was mass death (we didnt know just how lethal it could be at the time) and catastrophic economic damage.
Sure, some people took the piss and made a quick buck, but next to the absurdity of a months long tender and procurement process in a national crisis that was very much the lesser of two evils.2 -
This is legally and historically simply wrong. Please don't comment on matters that you know nothing about. The SC exercises the powers of the former Judicial Committee of the (appointed) House of Lords who made hundreds of similar decisions.. This has always happened. Administrative law has always existed. People like you were fulminating against the (appointed) Court of Appeal after Wednesbury.Luckyguy1983 said:
Whether a new oil well can proceed legally is a matter for parliament and the appropriate local authorities. It is a complete abuse of "supreme court" powers to intervene on these spurious grounds, effectively to prevent any new oil wells being built in this country - economical self-harm which is for elected parliamentarians to inflict if they so wish, because they can be de-elected again. It's not for an appointed body to stretch its remit and make decisions like this.Gallowgate said:
People like @Luckyguy1983 clearly have no understanding of our legal system whatsoever. This is how it has ALWAYS worked.eek said:
Um no, it interprets the current law and generates a result.Luckyguy1983 said:Absolutely disgusting "Supreme Court" judgement means a completely legal oil well project in Surrey has had its licence rescinded because it didn't 'take into account' the emissions that would result from consumers burning the product.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-surrey-oil-judgment-undermines-our-democracy/
This appointed court is not a part of our constitution; it has no legitimacy, and it is effectively making up law. It needs to be binned.
The new Labour Government can change the law and fix the issue all the Supreme Court has done is combine the law as it currently is and come to (an admittedly unexpected) conclusion..
The SC is part of our constitution because the Blair Government put it there to replace the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords - whose final members were the first justices of the SC. Disagree with the decision all you like but if you think the executive should be above the law, as you imply, you are advocating reversing over 400 years of English and British history.4 -
Good point, though it mainly highlights how far decoupled from reality the British right is.noneoftheabove said:
Bear in mind that to the few Tories who are still with them, Sunak is not a centre-right Brexiteer but a lefty big state remainer.Stuartinromford said:
Eh?MisterBedfordshire said:
That is exactly what I thought when I saw it and rooted around a bit before I posted to check that it is a Genuine Tory Video.Andy_JS said:
I'm sorry, this has to be a parody account. It cannot be genuine.MisterBedfordshire said:To all those who are reluctantly voting Conservative because of Farage and his views on immigration.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1803734430206284139?t=hRDJapCDsBRUEQ-8BnU7JQ&s=19
5.6 million views so far.
(The video is of someone raking a beach and laying a red carpet down to the sea with the words "Welcome" written in the sand with a subtitle saying "Labours approach to Illegal immigration"
Rather amusing that pompous centrist Tories are voting Tory instead of Libdem to keep Reform out when their own party is putting out stuff like this).
The pompous centrist Tories buggered off to Lib and Lab ages ago, in part because of stuff like this.0 -
So if you’re on a gap year abroad there are no exemptions for National Service, you’re expected to travel back and do those weekends , if you’re working you lose pay . And military places are capped at 30,000 so if more wanted to do that they won’t be able to .
The NS policy is a pathetic attempt to appeal to those that never did it but think the youth of today aren’t up to much.2 -
This wasn’t a leak. This was a hack.edmundintokyo said:
If you've got an organization with 1.5 million employees handling data on maybe 50 million people, you're going to leak some of it.Andy_JS said:
Why isn't security better?FrancisUrquhart said:London hospitals hackers publish stolen blood test data
Overnight on Thursday they shared almost 400GB of the private information on their darknet site and Telegram channel. The data includes patient names, dates of birth, NHS numbers and descriptions of blood tests. It is not known if test results are also in the data. There are also business account spreadsheets detailing financial arrangements between hospitals and GP services and Synnovis.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9ww90j9dj8o1 -
You also didn't spot how much impact Sunak leaving the D-Day ceremony early would have. Maybe you need your re-tune your antennae?Casino_Royale said:
Why? I've never understood this "scandal".Dopermean said:I can't really be bothered about what at most is a few thousand in betting wins.
However suspending procurement processes then awarding £bns in contracts to associates for non-compliant PPE in a national crisis, I'd like to see the culprits in prison and their assets seized as proceeds of crime.
We were potentially in an apocalyptic position and we needed kit, vaccines and supplies - fast - even at the cost of inefficiency and inflated prices. The alternative was mass death (we didnt know just how lethal it could be at the time) and catastrophic economic damage.
Sure, some people took the piss and made a quick buck, but next to the absurdity of a months long tender and procurement process in a national crisis that was very much the lesser of two evils.1
