Quite a sinister sounding statement from the ANC, saying that Afrikaner refugees are “fleeing from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege”.of
I'm interpreting this as you saying white South Africans have a lower IQ than their compatriots. Or am I wrong?
I would suggest that the ones who are still there are probably stupider than the ones who left two decades ago.
My wife is from South Africa, almost her university entire graduating class left the country. Her best friend from High School and her husband, very successful entreupreners, have been here in LA for a decade.
The ones who are left behind are not the brightest, because even the moderately not dim saw the direction of travel more than a decade ago.
(Interestingly, we're now hiring very bright black South Africans who are graduating from prestiguous South African universities and see better opportunities abroad.)
So you're saying the brightest South Africans are the whites who saw the inevitable chaotic and miserable end of black majority rule and got out early? Or am I somehow misinterpreting?
I am saying the brighter whites left two decades ago, and it is the stupid whites left.
And now it is the bright africans who are leaving.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
The clear implication is that South Africa was bound to fail under black majority rule so the smart white people left ASAFP
This isn't a gotcha. I'm just intrigued that you are being so candid with your opinion. Most effete LA liberals hedge around the issue, indeed most people anywhere do so
Perhaps it is another symptom of the Vibeshift
If you have one group of people oppressed by another, who then take over, then yes I think it's highly likely things will get fucked up. You see this with national liberation movements across South America too.
South Africa has fallen well behind -say- Botswana, and that has democratic black african rule. But it also had the advantage that it didn't have the bulk of the country's wealth being held by a few people who looked different from most of the population.
Fair enough
The interesting countries are the exceptions
Chile and Uruguay stand out in LatAm
In MENA Morocco seems to have done best in delivering relative freedom, increasing prosperity, gender equality (within reason), while avoiding Islamism or hideous despotism
Kazakhstan has done comparatively very well, weirdly (having just been there).
Morocco did take Western Sahara within its boundaries - and secured it with the world's biggest minefield.
There's a part of me that says "how do you do a minefield in a desert"?
"Moroccan engineers built the Berm—a 1,500-mile tract of land mines and elevated barricades that cuts through the Western Sahara.
The Berm is one of the most secure defensive barriers ever. It consists of 10-foot-high walls, barbed wire, electric fences and, every seven miles, human sentries. On top of that, the fortification lies amid the world’s longest continuous minefield."
Gary Lineker has deleted an Instagram story post he shared from the group Palestine Lobby, which said: "Zionism explained in two minutes" and featured an illustration of a rat.
A rat has historically been used as an antisemitic insult, referring to language used by Nazi Germany to characterise Jews.
Lineker's agent told the BBC the presenter immediately deleted the post when he learned about the image's symbolism.
I think Gary might be wise to put the phone down for a bit....its a weird given his interest in these issues how blind he is to such tropes, like Jezza not understanding the problematic mural. What do you mean, bankers, hooked noses, puppets etc, they are antisemitic tropes, i never knew....
Yes, it isn't believable in the slightest. Rich celebrities are just like normal people, they get fed stuff by social media algorithms, post and comment on them without thought, getting a rush from their actions, and 'miss' obvious red flags.
Corbyn's case was actually slightly different in that example you give - he knew it would not be believed he could not see the symbolism was offensive (though his supporters made that argument, including some surprising voices on here), he instead argued he hadn't noticed the accompanying image at all ("I sincerely regret that I did not look more closely at the image I was commenting on, the contents of which are deeply disturbing and anti-Semitic." were his words).
He was a liar, in other words. A man of gentle manners, but not as cuddly as people think he is. He cannot both be an authority on these subjects and conveniently ignorant of the darker side.
I saw Lineker's interview with Amol Rajan and while he came across as a bit dim, he also seemed sincere. And there are many many reasons to despise what Israel is doing in Gaza
But reposting a post about Zionism with a rat emoji? REALLY? Jud Suss 2.0?
If Lineker claims the right to use social media as he wishes, about contentious issues, and he forcefully does this, then he must also be closely judged by what he does put on social media, because he is not a random celebrity liking the odd Facebook post. Social media is where Lineker exists, on his own admission
And that was a grave social media error - at best - and the BBC should sever any links with him
My test has long been when it comes to stuff like posting crap on social media. Everybody can make a mistake, they can post an offensive tweet and the first time you get a pass from me, particularly if you made such a tweet 10 years ago when you were 15.
Lineker like some other middle aged celebs lives and breath social media. They are on it round the clock. And he keeps doing this. Remember he posted fake news about a poor innocent footballer who was killed, who turned out was a well known terrorist. But he just instantly was retweet, like, follow, share.....it keeps happening.
The only time he wasn't instantly reweet, like, follow, share, was weirdly went he went missing for 4-5 days around the time of the October 7th massacre. Only months later did he then try the yes of course I was disgusted by this incident....
Yes, he's now gone beyond "oops what was I thinking" into a pattern of deliberate thinking: time and again
He's not a regular on the BBC, the BBC doesn't need him, time to cut the old anti-Semitic fucker adrift. He reminds me of Roger Waters
Quite a sinister sounding statement from the ANC, saying that Afrikaner refugees are “fleeing from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege”.of
I'm interpreting this as you saying white South Africans have a lower IQ than their compatriots. Or am I wrong?
I would suggest that the ones who are still there are probably stupider than the ones who left two decades ago.
My wife is from South Africa, almost her university entire graduating class left the country. Her best friend from High School and her husband, very successful entreupreners, have been here in LA for a decade.
The ones who are left behind are not the brightest, because even the moderately not dim saw the direction of travel more than a decade ago.
(Interestingly, we're now hiring very bright black South Africans who are graduating from prestiguous South African universities and see better opportunities abroad.)
So you're saying the brightest South Africans are the whites who saw the inevitable chaotic and miserable end of black majority rule and got out early? Or am I somehow misinterpreting?
I am saying the brighter whites left two decades ago, and it is the stupid whites left.
And now it is the bright africans who are leaving.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
The clear implication is that South Africa was bound to fail under black majority rule so the smart white people left ASAFP
This isn't a gotcha. I'm just intrigued that you are being so candid with your opinion. Most effete LA liberals hedge around the issue, indeed most people anywhere do so
Perhaps it is another symptom of the Vibeshift
If you have one group of people oppressed by another, who then take over, then yes I think it's highly likely things will get fucked up. You see this with national liberation movements across South America too.
South Africa has fallen well behind -say- Botswana, and that has democratic black african rule. But it also had the advantage that it didn't have the bulk of the country's wealth being held by a few people who looked different from most of the population.
Fair enough
The interesting countries are the exceptions
Chile and Uruguay stand out in LatAm
In MENA Morocco seems to have done best in delivering relative freedom, increasing prosperity, gender equality (within reason), while avoiding Islamism or hideous despotism
Kazakhstan has done comparatively very well, weirdly (having just been there).
Morocco did take Western Sahara within its boundaries - and secured it with the world's biggest minefield.
There's a part of me that says "how do you do a minefield in a desert"?
Quite a sinister sounding statement from the ANC, saying that Afrikaner refugees are “fleeing from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege”.of
I'm interpreting this as you saying white South Africans have a lower IQ than their compatriots. Or am I wrong?
I would suggest that the ones who are still there are probably stupider than the ones who left two decades ago.
My wife is from South Africa, almost her university entire graduating class left the country. Her best friend from High School and her husband, very successful entreupreners, have been here in LA for a decade.
The ones who are left behind are not the brightest, because even the moderately not dim saw the direction of travel more than a decade ago.
(Interestingly, we're now hiring very bright black South Africans who are graduating from prestiguous South African universities and see better opportunities abroad.)
So you're saying the brightest South Africans are the whites who saw the inevitable chaotic and miserable end of black majority rule and got out early? Or am I somehow misinterpreting?
I am saying the brighter whites left two decades ago, and it is the stupid whites left.
And now it is the bright africans who are leaving.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
The clear implication is that South Africa was bound to fail under black majority rule so the smart white people left ASAFP
This isn't a gotcha. I'm just intrigued that you are being so candid with your opinion. Most effete LA liberals hedge around the issue, indeed most people anywhere do so
Perhaps it is another symptom of the Vibeshift
If you have one group of people oppressed by another, who then take over, then yes I think it's highly likely things will get fucked up. You see this with national liberation movements across South America too.
South Africa has fallen well behind -say- Botswana, and that has democratic black african rule. But it also had the advantage that it didn't have the bulk of the country's wealth being held by a few people who looked different from most of the population.
Fair enough
The interesting countries are the exceptions
Chile and Uruguay stand out in LatAm
In MENA Morocco seems to have done best in delivering relative freedom, increasing prosperity, gender equality (within reason), while avoiding Islamism or hideous despotism
Kazakhstan has done comparatively very well, weirdly (having just been there).
Morocco did take Western Sahara within its boundaries - and secured it with the world's biggest minefield.
There's a part of me that says "how do you do a minefield in a desert"?
"Moroccan engineers built the Berm—a 1,500-mile tract of land mines and elevated barricades that cuts through the Western Sahara.
The Berm is one of the most secure defensive barriers ever. It consists of 10-foot-high walls, barbed wire, electric fences and, every seven miles, human sentries. On top of that, the fortification lies amid the world’s longest continuous minefield."
Ah, but can you see it fully illuminated from space like the India-Pakistani border?
Gary Lineker has deleted an Instagram story post he shared from the group Palestine Lobby, which said: "Zionism explained in two minutes" and featured an illustration of a rat.
A rat has historically been used as an antisemitic insult, referring to language used by Nazi Germany to characterise Jews.
Lineker's agent told the BBC the presenter immediately deleted the post when he learned about the image's symbolism.
I think Gary might be wise to put the phone down for a bit....its a weird given his interest in these issues how blind he is to such tropes, like Jezza not understanding the problematic mural. What do you mean, bankers, hooked noses, puppets etc, they are antisemitic tropes, i never knew....
Sorry, even if someone didn't know that a rat was such a symbol, they should have thought twice about using it, in the circumstances.
Translation: When I posted an image of a rat I had no idea I was posting an image of a rat. I saw a post which seemed to support my view of dirty stinking rat-like Jews but I had no idea the image of a rat was meant to imply Jews are dirty and rat- like."
Also it was a dodgy account he was reposting and again he keeps doing it. Its not like he is reposting a Guardian article and then somebody saying well the Guardian were wrong there about some facts and he can say how am I supposed to know.
Gary Lineker has deleted an Instagram story post he shared from the group Palestine Lobby, which said: "Zionism explained in two minutes" and featured an illustration of a rat.
A rat has historically been used as an antisemitic insult, referring to language used by Nazi Germany to characterise Jews.
Lineker's agent told the BBC the presenter immediately deleted the post when he learned about the image's symbolism.
I think Gary might be wise to put the phone down for a bit....its a weird given his interest in these issues how blind he is to such tropes, like Jezza not understanding the problematic mural. What do you mean, bankers, hooked noses, puppets etc, they are antisemitic tropes, i never knew....
Yes, it isn't believable in the slightest. Rich celebrities are just like normal people, they get fed stuff by social media algorithms, post and comment on them without thought, getting a rush from their actions, and 'miss' obvious red flags.
Corbyn's case was actually slightly different in that example you give - he knew it would not be believed he could not see the symbolism was offensive (though his supporters made that argument, including some surprising voices on here), he instead argued he hadn't noticed the accompanying image at all ("I sincerely regret that I did not look more closely at the image I was commenting on, the contents of which are deeply disturbing and anti-Semitic." were his words).
He was a liar, in other words. A man of gentle manners, but not as cuddly as people think he is. He cannot both be an authority on these subjects and conveniently ignorant of the darker side.
I saw Lineker's interview with Amol Rajan and while he came across as a bit dim, he also seemed sincere. And there are many many reasons to despise what Israel is doing in Gaza
But reposting a post about Zionism with a rat emoji? REALLY? Jud Suss 2.0?
If Lineker claims the right to use social media as he wishes, about contentious issues, and he forcefully does this, then he must also be closely judged by what he does put on social media, because he is not a random celebrity liking the odd Facebook post. Social media is where Lineker exists, on his own admission
And that was a grave social media error - at best - and the BBC should sever any links with him
My test has long been when it comes to stuff like posting crap on social media. Everybody can make a mistake, they can post an offensive tweet and the first time you get a pass from me, particularly if you made such a tweet 10 years ago when you were 15.
Lineker like some other middle aged celebs lives and breath social media. They are on it round the clock. And he keeps doing this. Remember he posted fake news about a poor innocent footballer who was killed, who turned out was a well known terrorist. But he just instantly was retweet, like, follow, share.....it keeps happening.
The only time he wasn't instantly reweet, like, follow, share, was weirdly went he went missing for 4-5 days around the time of the October 7th massacre. Only months later did he then try the yes of course I was disgusted by this incident....
Yes, he's now gone beyond "oops what was I thinking" into a pattern of deliberate thinking: time and again
He's not a regular on the BBC, the BBC doesn't need him, time to cut the old anti-Semitic fucker adrift. He reminds me of Roger Waters
And I LOVE Dark Side of the Moon, and always will
One of the lesser highlighted elements of his deal to leave the BBC MOTD, they have agreed to pay him a load of money to carry his podcasts on BBC sounds. He is probably going to be getting more money from the BBC than he does now.
Even more unpopular, although what plenty of other countries do, and what we did before, how about children look after their elderly parents?
That's a bit of a myth.
There was never an age when children looked after so many people with dementia.
In the olden days most people who are now in care homes would not be getting looked after by their children (many of whom have been through hell looking after their parents before they ended up in the home) . . . they'd be dead.
It's not a myth. That's how old people are looked after in Bulgaria, like what my mother in law did with her mother. Who had multiple health issues. With a visitor to help her once a day - she did it morning and night before leaving for work and after coming home.
It's just not the culture here. And quite frankly we don't want to do it.
Multi-generational households. Women not working. It's pretty simple.
The idea there were no old people is a bit of a myth too. A large chunk of lower life expectancy was death in childhood. If you made it to age 50 in the middle of the 19th century, you could expect to make 70.
Let's get even more controversial: how much of our GDP do we want to spend keeping elderly people alive who have dementia, and aren't aware of themselves or their families anymore, who perhaps rarely visit them?
I'm not asking this to be nasty, and I recognise it's an uncomfortable question, but it's one worth reflecting on because from the perspective of the public purse it's one I struggle to justify against other priorities.
Are you advocating euthanasia? The assisted dying bill swerves this requiring mental capacity and less than 6 month life expectancy.
I haven't a clue. The ethics are horrendous every way I turn.
But, we accept "turning off the life support machine" for those with no prospect of recovery and this for me feels like a shade of grey to that.
To cheer you up, age-adjusted rates of dementia are dropping quite fast across high-income countries, possibly linked to a fall in smoking rates (lots of alternative theories).
Doubtful as most smokers probably die before being old enough to get dementia, the cause of the increase in dementia is nothing more than medical science keeping people alive too long. Dementia was not a big issue in the 70's and 80's when more people smoked
Perhaps more than an age effect – I dimly recall smoking being a protective factor for Alzheimer's or Parkinson's or one of those brain lurgies.
Alzheimers.
Though probably the apparent benefit was survival bias. Not many active smokers live long enough to get dementia.
So do you give advice to smoking patients....you should give up so you get chance to get dementia?
Carry on Smoking. Pay more tax. Die early and save the state the cost of pension and healthcare. 👍
Smoking is good for you. Here is Tommy Hampson describing the day he won gold in the 800 metres at the Los Angeles Olympics: Had lunch of boiled fish, dry toast and a cup of tea. Then I had a cigarette and chatted over technical details with teammates. World record too.
Not only that, a lot of famous Everest climbers smoked.
"Everest pioneers smoked their way up to the summit Mountaineers from the golden age of climbing relied almost as heavily on tobacco as they did on ropes and bottled oxygen" (£)
Even more unpopular, although what plenty of other countries do, and what we did before, how about children look after their elderly parents?
That's a bit of a myth.
There was never an age when children looked after so many people with dementia.
In the olden days most people who are now in care homes would not be getting looked after by their children (many of whom have been through hell looking after their parents before they ended up in the home) . . . they'd be dead.
It's not a myth. That's how old people are looked after in Bulgaria, like what my mother in law did with her mother. Who had multiple health issues. With a visitor to help her once a day - she did it morning and night before leaving for work and after coming home.
It's just not the culture here. And quite frankly we don't want to do it.
Multi-generational households. Women not working. It's pretty simple.
The idea there were no old people is a bit of a myth too. A large chunk of lower life expectancy was death in childhood. If you made it to age 50 in the middle of the 19th century, you could expect to make 70.
Let's get even more controversial: how much of our GDP do we want to spend keeping elderly people alive who have dementia, and aren't aware of themselves or their families anymore, who perhaps rarely visit them?
I'm not asking this to be nasty, and I recognise it's an uncomfortable question, but it's one worth reflecting on because from the perspective of the public purse it's one I struggle to justify against other priorities.
Are you advocating euthanasia? The assisted dying bill swerves this requiring mental capacity and less than 6 month life expectancy.
I haven't a clue. The ethics are horrendous every way I turn.
But, we accept "turning off the life support machine" for those with no prospect of recovery and this for me feels like a shade of grey to that.
To cheer you up, age-adjusted rates of dementia are dropping quite fast across high-income countries, possibly linked to a fall in smoking rates (lots of alternative theories).
Doubtful as most smokers probably die before being old enough to get dementia, the cause of the increase in dementia is nothing more than medical science keeping people alive too long. Dementia was not a big issue in the 70's and 80's when more people smoked
Perhaps more than an age effect – I dimly recall smoking being a protective factor for Alzheimer's or Parkinson's or one of those brain lurgies.
Alzheimers.
Though probably the apparent benefit was survival bias. Not many active smokers live long enough to get dementia.
So do you give advice to smoking patients....you should give up so you get chance to get dementia?
Carry on Smoking. Pay more tax. Die early and save the state the cost of pension and healthcare. 👍
Smoking is good for you. Here is Tommy Hampson describing the day he won gold in the 800 metres at the Los Angeles Olympics: Had lunch of boiled fish, dry toast and a cup of tea. Then I had a cigarette and chatted over technical details with teammates. World record too.
Not only that, a lot of famous Everest climbers smoked.
"Everest pioneers smoked their way up to the summit Mountaineers from the golden age of climbing relied almost as heavily on tobacco as they did on ropes and bottled oxygen" (£)
If I heard right, Zarah Sultana just accused Downing Street of using language straight out of a Enoch Powell PDF. Newsnight.
I bet the vast majority of the public thought little about the language in Starrmers speech. Its is this weird very vocal bunch of people that get to shout about it on the media. When I think the reaction will have been in general yes I think there is too much immigration or hmm, I worry that I hire from abroad this could be tricky e.g. care sector or I have a partner who is here on a visa what does that mean for us.
I highly doubt anybody was going bloody hell that Starmer bloke has turned into Enoch Powell.
Not a very good agent if they got caught in one day and attacked places he doesn't live.
"The suspect, whose nationality has not been disclosed,"
Be a bit awkward if it is the Iranians again that came via boat and stayed in a government funded hotel. It is interesting how little coverage this revelation is getting after being reported by Mark White (one of the reliable proper journalists on GB News) and hasn't had the usual racist conspiracy theory much racking response.
Quite a sinister sounding statement from the ANC, saying that Afrikaner refugees are “fleeing from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege”.of
I'm interpreting this as you saying white South Africans have a lower IQ than their compatriots. Or am I wrong?
I would suggest that the ones who are still there are probably stupider than the ones who left two decades ago.
My wife is from South Africa, almost her university entire graduating class left the country. Her best friend from High School and her husband, very successful entreupreners, have been here in LA for a decade.
The ones who are left behind are not the brightest, because even the moderately not dim saw the direction of travel more than a decade ago.
(Interestingly, we're now hiring very bright black South Africans who are graduating from prestiguous South African universities and see better opportunities abroad.)
So you're saying the brightest South Africans are the whites who saw the inevitable chaotic and miserable end of black majority rule and got out early? Or am I somehow misinterpreting?
I am saying the brighter whites left two decades ago, and it is the stupid whites left.
And now it is the bright africans who are leaving.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
The clear implication is that South Africa was bound to fail under black majority rule so the smart white people left ASAFP
This isn't a gotcha. I'm just intrigued that you are being so candid with your opinion. Most effete LA liberals hedge around the issue, indeed most people anywhere do so
Perhaps it is another symptom of the Vibeshift
If you have one group of people oppressed by another, who then take over, then yes I think it's highly likely things will get fucked up. You see this with national liberation movements across South America too.
South Africa has fallen well behind -say- Botswana, and that has democratic black african rule. But it also had the advantage that it didn't have the bulk of the country's wealth being held by a few people who looked different from most of the population.
Fair enough
The interesting countries are the exceptions
Chile and Uruguay stand out in LatAm
In MENA Morocco seems to have done best in delivering relative freedom, increasing prosperity, gender equality (within reason), while avoiding Islamism or hideous despotism
Kazakhstan has done comparatively very well, weirdly (having just been there).
Morocco did take Western Sahara within its boundaries - and secured it with the world's biggest minefield.
There's a part of me that says "how do you do a minefield in a desert"?
Not heard of the Battle of El Alamein?
Yes. But I didn't know it had a minefield. Obviously my knowledge is lacking in this respect.
Quite a sinister sounding statement from the ANC, saying that Afrikaner refugees are “fleeing from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege”.of
I'm interpreting this as you saying white South Africans have a lower IQ than their compatriots. Or am I wrong?
I would suggest that the ones who are still there are probably stupider than the ones who left two decades ago.
My wife is from South Africa, almost her university entire graduating class left the country. Her best friend from High School and her husband, very successful entreupreners, have been here in LA for a decade.
The ones who are left behind are not the brightest, because even the moderately not dim saw the direction of travel more than a decade ago.
(Interestingly, we're now hiring very bright black South Africans who are graduating from prestiguous South African universities and see better opportunities abroad.)
So you're saying the brightest South Africans are the whites who saw the inevitable chaotic and miserable end of black majority rule and got out early? Or am I somehow misinterpreting?
I am saying the brighter whites left two decades ago, and it is the stupid whites left.
And now it is the bright africans who are leaving.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
The clear implication is that South Africa was bound to fail under black majority rule so the smart white people left ASAFP
This isn't a gotcha. I'm just intrigued that you are being so candid with your opinion. Most effete LA liberals hedge around the issue, indeed most people anywhere do so
Perhaps it is another symptom of the Vibeshift
If you have one group of people oppressed by another, who then take over, then yes I think it's highly likely things will get fucked up. You see this with national liberation movements across South America too.
South Africa has fallen well behind -say- Botswana, and that has democratic black african rule. But it also had the advantage that it didn't have the bulk of the country's wealth being held by a few people who looked different from most of the population.
Fair enough
The interesting countries are the exceptions
Chile and Uruguay stand out in LatAm
In MENA Morocco seems to have done best in delivering relative freedom, increasing prosperity, gender equality (within reason), while avoiding Islamism or hideous despotism
Kazakhstan has done comparatively very well, weirdly (having just been there).
Morocco: monarchy. Monarchies do better on the balancing freedom and responsibility thing, as a rule.
Yes, they absolutely do
If I could advise any young nation finding its first way in the world (and, frankly, I'd be good at this) I would say: Be a monarchy, preferably an ancient monarchy. It really really helps. It provides stablity, it provides identity, it is a source of reassurance, pageantry, pride, accrued wisdom
We would be insane to get rid of ours, for all its flaws, and - thankfully - there is little chance of our doing so. Indeed I suspect the tendency is now TOWARDS monarchy in much of the world. Australia, Canada and NZ are all less likely to go republican than they were ten years ago, for instance
See also Spain. Franco had many disadvantages (obs) but he had enough smarts to see he was succeeded by a monarchy. As the Soviet/Russia handover proved, you can't go straight to a full liberal democratic Republic overnight, you have to go thru intermediate stages to build up the institutions, and a monarchy is pretty good for that.
Errr:
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have all done a pretty good job of going straight to full liberal democracies.
Fair point. But perhaps a monarchy would have done just as well and perhaps better?
I think the point is a monarchy is a safeguard. An alternative source of authority if the day to day leader goes a bit bonkers.
See for example how Boris “lying to the Queen” and partying while she mourned had fatal consequences for his premiership, or indeed how even one step removed, Trump’s respect/fear of the British monarchy reins him in with us a bit.
If I heard right, Zarah Sultana just accused Downing Street of using language straight out of a Enoch Powell PDF. Newsnight.
I bet the vast majority of the public thought little about the language in Starrmers speech. Its is this weird very vocal bunch of people that get to shout about it on the media. When I think the reaction will have been in general yes I think there is too much immigration or hmm, I worry that I hire from abroad this could be tricky e.g. care sector or I have a partner who is here on a visa what does that mean for us.
I highly doubt anybody was going bloody hell that Starmer bloke has turned into Enoch Powell.
It's a rather transparent attempt to turn general party discontent at their present polling position into a serious challenge for the PM by associating him with something anathema to the overall membership.
I don't think people are going to buy it, anymore than Tory attempts to paint him as some dangerous radical did, it just isn't very plausible.
"The University of Greater Manchester has suspended its vice chancellor following "serious allegations".
Professor George Holmes, who has led the university for 20 years, has been suspended alongside two senior members of academic staff at the institution, formerly known as the University of Bolton.
It comes after the university commissioned an independent investigation into recent allegations made about the institution in Bolton."
He's only paid ballpark £300k, so it wouldn't be beyond sympathy if something had to be done to top that up. Thoughts and prayers.
Wasn't the University of Bolton V.C. the highest paid of them all at one point?
Somewhere there must be a table of VC salaries and 'number of staff they intend to sack due to financial woes'. I might ask gpt's "deep research" just to get my moneys-worth.
"What does emerge is a sector-wide pattern: universities have responded to financial pressures largely by reducing staff costs (often the single biggest expense) rather than by cutting top salaries."
Probably the Russians. Think Salisbury and Litvinenko.
However the Russians are competent, they get the job done and are out the country before people even know it happened. Not firebomb a flat whose address connection to Starmer is because its on companies house because Starmer owns the freehold and get caught within the day.
Perhaps they were the hypothetical Iranian terrorists coming over on boats mentioned by Farage.
"hypothetical" = "true" ?
Golly, so there are definitely Iranian terrorists who have travelled to the UK on migrant boats via the Channel?
Its was reported by Mark White the other day that some of the suspects had arrived by irregular means (which is the terminology for the boat people) and were in asylum hotels.
Perhaps they were the hypothetical Iranian terrorists coming over on boats mentioned by Farage.
"hypothetical" = "true" ?
Golly, so there are definitely Iranian terrorists who have travelled to the UK on migrant boats via the Channel?
Its was reported by Mark White the other day that some of the suspects had arrived by irregular means (which is the terminology for the boat people) and were in asylum hotels.
Probably the Russians. Think Salisbury and Litvinenko.
However the Russians are competent, they get the job done and are out the country before people even know it happened. Not firebomb a flat whose address connection to Starmer is because its on companies house because Starmer owns the freehold and get caught within the day.
Perhaps they were the hypothetical Iranian terrorists coming over on boats mentioned by Farage.
"hypothetical" = "true" ?
Golly, so there are definitely Iranian terrorists who have travelled to the UK on migrant boats via the Channel?
Its was reported by Mark White the other day that some of the suspects had arrived by irregular means (which is the terminology for the boat people) and were in asylum hotels.
Who is Mark White?
He a journalist for GB News, but he was Home Affairs Correspondent for Sky News for 20 years i.e. one of the few proper journalists on there.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
STOP THE BOATS, SMASH THE GANGS....Do another deal with France that means we pay £10s million year for them to scratch their arses. The problem is the French authorities are happy to get rid of these people so the motivation is not to detain them, loads of paperwork, then rinse and repeat.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Perhaps they were the hypothetical Iranian terrorists coming over on boats mentioned by Farage.
"hypothetical" = "true" ?
Golly, so there are definitely Iranian terrorists who have travelled to the UK on migrant boats via the Channel?
Its was reported by Mark White the other day that some of the suspects had arrived by irregular means (which is the terminology for the boat people) and were in asylum hotels.
Who is Mark White?
He a journalist for GB News, but he was Home Affairs Correspondent for Sky News for donkeys years i.e. one of the few proper journalists on there.
Not being a consumer of Sky News or (checks notes) GB News, I was unaware of this titan of news reporting. Presumably he’s now one of even fewer proper journalists at GB News,
Even more unpopular, although what plenty of other countries do, and what we did before, how about children look after their elderly parents?
That's a bit of a myth.
There was never an age when children looked after so many people with dementia.
In the olden days most people who are now in care homes would not be getting looked after by their children (many of whom have been through hell looking after their parents before they ended up in the home) . . . they'd be dead.
It's not a myth. That's how old people are looked after in Bulgaria, like what my mother in law did with her mother. Who had multiple health issues. With a visitor to help her once a day - she did it morning and night before leaving for work and after coming home.
It's just not the culture here. And quite frankly we don't want to do it.
Multi-generational households. Women not working. It's pretty simple.
The idea there were no old people is a bit of a myth too. A large chunk of lower life expectancy was death in childhood. If you made it to age 50 in the middle of the 19th century, you could expect to make 70.
Let's get even more controversial: how much of our GDP do we want to spend keeping elderly people alive who have dementia, and aren't aware of themselves or their families anymore, who perhaps rarely visit them?
I'm not asking this to be nasty, and I recognise it's an uncomfortable question, but it's one worth reflecting on because from the perspective of the public purse it's one I struggle to justify against other priorities.
We do look after my mother in law at home and she doesn't show much sign of knowing who people are, even if there is some vague familiarity somewhere.
When she was a bit livelier than she is now she often repeated that "I want to be dead".
Did she mean it? I believe so - but unfortunately, no court or euthanasia scheme would have been able to act on it because she would have failed any tests. In the past when compus mentis she would definitely have argued for the option but choosing the right timing is impossible.
I don't know how we solve this problem, save for finding out what causes Alzheimer's in the first place. This might prove easier than navigating the moral dilemmas.
Perhaps they were the hypothetical Iranian terrorists coming over on boats mentioned by Farage.
"hypothetical" = "true" ?
Golly, so there are definitely Iranian terrorists who have travelled to the UK on migrant boats via the Channel?
Its was reported by Mark White the other day that some of the suspects had arrived by irregular means (which is the terminology for the boat people) and were in asylum hotels.
Who is Mark White?
He a journalist for GB News, but he was Home Affairs Correspondent for Sky News for donkeys years i.e. one of the few proper journalists on there.
Not being a consumer of Sky News or (checks notes) GB News, I was unaware of this titan of news reporting. Presumably he’s now one of even fewer proper journalists at GB News,
You might not be and I am a generally low opinion of journalists and don't waste my time with those outlets, but 30 years doing that job, he is well connected and he is as credible as BBC / ITV / Sky journalist (which isn't true of most of the plonkers on GB News or Sky these days). It is possible he has been given duff info, but there hasn't been the sort of reaction like Southport when people spouted what were claimed to be falsehoods (some of which were definitely untrue and some closer to the truth than the reaction would have you believe).
Probably the Russians. Think Salisbury and Litvinenko.
It's not very sophisticated. The KGB would have been embarrassed.
When it was first reported these fires were connected I just presumed it would be some random idiot who has a grievance against the government for some policy decision and in a very low tech / low IQ way decided to attack the PM e.g. it the first we have heard that Mrs Starmer and his children don't live at their family home anymore....however I am sure the likes of FSB are well aware of every leaders and their families living arrangements / routines.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Quite a sinister sounding statement from the ANC, saying that Afrikaner refugees are “fleeing from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege”.of
I'm interpreting this as you saying white South Africans have a lower IQ than their compatriots. Or am I wrong?
I would suggest that the ones who are still there are probably stupider than the ones who left two decades ago.
My wife is from South Africa, almost her university entire graduating class left the country. Her best friend from High School and her husband, very successful entreupreners, have been here in LA for a decade.
The ones who are left behind are not the brightest, because even the moderately not dim saw the direction of travel more than a decade ago.
(Interestingly, we're now hiring very bright black South Africans who are graduating from prestiguous South African universities and see better opportunities abroad.)
So you're saying the brightest South Africans are the whites who saw the inevitable chaotic and miserable end of black majority rule and got out early? Or am I somehow misinterpreting?
I am saying the brighter whites left two decades ago, and it is the stupid whites left.
And now it is the bright africans who are leaving.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
The clear implication is that South Africa was bound to fail under black majority rule so the smart white people left ASAFP
This isn't a gotcha. I'm just intrigued that you are being so candid with your opinion. Most effete LA liberals hedge around the issue, indeed most people anywhere do so
Perhaps it is another symptom of the Vibeshift
Why? It isn't rocket science. SA whites moved from a very privileged existence to black majority rules. On top of that there was probably a lot of resentment by the blacks and little experience of Govt. The transition of Govt in most of African countries from colonial rule has not been a roaring success. I know in SA case it wasn't from colonial rule, but it was very similar.
Frankly I am surprised it has gone as well as it has. It could have been a lot worse. Most countries fell into a bloody civil war.
If you were an Afrikaner farmer would you have not got out early.
You really do have an odd opinion of liberals. There is a distinction between ideals and reality.
Afrikaner farmers families have often held those farms for centuries, not easy for them just to leave.
The ANC say they want a multi racial S Africa but aren't doing much to help that with these Mugable like farm confiscations and Trump has correctly offered farming families still there at risk of losing their farms an exit
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Even more unpopular, although what plenty of other countries do, and what we did before, how about children look after their elderly parents?
That's a bit of a myth.
There was never an age when children looked after so many people with dementia.
In the olden days most people who are now in care homes would not be getting looked after by their children (many of whom have been through hell looking after their parents before they ended up in the home) . . . they'd be dead.
It's not a myth. That's how old people are looked after in Bulgaria, like what my mother in law did with her mother. Who had multiple health issues. With a visitor to help her once a day - she did it morning and night before leaving for work and after coming home.
It's just not the culture here. And quite frankly we don't want to do it.
The idea there were no old people is a bit of a myth too. A large chunk of lower life expectancy was death in childhood. If you made it to age 50 in the middle of the 19th century, you could expect to make 70.
Yes, it's an oddly pervasive myth that one. Doesn't mean that the level and extent of support that would now be needed to look after the very very old is not more extreme, and possibly not as managable (90 year olds being looked after by 70 year olds looked after by 50 year olds?), but old folks would not have been quite as rare as imagined.
Your definition of old may vary though.
Old at 70 and old at 90 are two very different kettles of fish.
Change can come very rapidly at those ages as well. Some 70 years are in tremendous shape (some 90 year olds too, for their age, but far fewer of course).
Life expectancy at older ages had hardly changed over the last 150 years though. The reason you have more 90 year olds now is because of better healthcare provision earlier on, not because we've got better at keeping octogenarians alive.
We've become considerably better at keeping octogenarians alive.
Former death sentences like cancer are treated much better today.
We haven't, sorry. An 85 year old in 1841 had a life expectancy of 4 years. We've bumped that up to 6 in 190 years.
That seems like a reasonably significant increase, given that the chances of dying soon at that age, particularly for men, are relatively high. On top of which more people are making that age in the first place.
I guess so, but it hardly explains the increase in problems with dementia. The change in the last 30 years or so is tiny.
In 1950 the percentage of people who reached 80 was 0.6% now its over 5%.....therefore the increase in dementia and has substantially increased in percentage since 1990
(It must be a lot higher than 5%?)
The distinction here is our ability to keep 80 year olds going is not the primary factor why dementia caseload has increased so much. It's our ability to get so many more people to 80.
I think the other thing to bear in mind is not to get lost in the percentage changes. So, there has been a massive percentage increase in the number of people aged 95. But it's not that many people, compared with say the number of 65 year old men getting treatment for heart disease.
Wow no correlation between keeping people alive longer and an increase of a disease that comes with age.....shakes head
The increase is due to the increase in numbers of elderly, what @Eabhal is saying is that the risk to any individual elderly person is dropping.
Statins, BP control etc all help with vascular aging, so probably down to that, as well as falling alcohol consumption.
Nothing wrong with being old if you are fit. My folks are 90 and 88 this year, and require no paid help. We are off to a family birthday of my mother's older sister this weekend. She needs no outside help either, apart from her daughter taking her to the supermarket once a week.
And the preventative medicine for alzheimers is what? As far as I know there is none
The new weight loss drugs, according to reports in the past few days, protect against dementia. It looks like they might even get youngsters off their smartphones.
I would think the evidence of that is scant....how would you know till those people get into the late 70's or early 80's
They have been used for ages already for diabetes.
Ozempic the best know one was only approved in 2017 and the phase 2 trial was in 2008 so I don't think they have sufficient data for that claim frankly assuming they tested on the normal age ranges the number of patients on the phase 2 trial that are now 80 would be small
While interesting and something to be welcomed....slowing the progression is not the same as preventing the disease
One of the issues with my father as well and many others is it took us six years to get him diagnosed. Six years in which he almost burnt his flat down, went missing on multiple occasions because he had remembered stuff such as my leave is up I need to report back to the ship as we are being deployed....so even if it slows the decline we wouldn't have got it prescribed in any case....was less than a year till we had to put him in a home because he was a danger to himself and needed more care than could be provided
My biggest issue with my father’s dementia and physical and mental decline is that if I could have him back to life I would do anything to clean him up, bath him, wipe his arse, just to have the chance for another drink and a chat with him and to give him a hug.
I honestly had other things in my life and my “own problems” where I felt he would be there forever.
I would do anything to re-do his last couple of years so make sure that if you feel you need to talk, spend time, understand things, do it now and not have the brutal regret I live with daily.
It is good for you that you had a father like that. Not all families however are the same and the schism between myself and my father is one of his making not mine. He chose not to know me or get to know me
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Isn't that usually a sign the French would like some more money from us to take action?
Cooper said the French have now agreed to remove migrants in the water
The French police will be locals. As far as they are concerned, refugees on boats are a problem solving itself.
The level of racism and hatred, around Calais, against the would be migrants, is pretty startling. I’m taking about comments that would have Tommy Lot Of Names saying “bit much”.
"Allison Pearson Our cretinous police must answer for their tyrannical behaviour in court The force that arrested retired officer Julian Foulkes over a ‘thought crime’ tweet has to face justice" (£)
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Isn't that usually a sign the French would like some more money from us to take action?
Cooper said the French have now agreed to remove migrants in the water
The French police will be locals. As far as they are concerned, refugees on boats are a problem solving itself.
The level of racism and hatred, around Calais, against the would be migrants, is pretty startling. I’m taking about comments that would have Tommy Lot Of Names saying “bit much”.
The French are supposed to be one of closest allies, yet their approach to the boats is undermining our security. That doesn't seem very friendly.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Isn't that usually a sign the French would like some more money from us to take action?
Cooper said the French have now agreed to remove migrants in the water
The French police will be locals. As far as they are concerned, refugees on boats are a problem solving itself.
The level of racism and hatred, around Calais, against the would be migrants, is pretty startling. I’m taking about comments that would have Tommy Lot Of Names saying “bit much”.
Having big camps of migrants on their doorstep has also been something that has been about in that part of France for what 20 years? The problem never really goes away from them. They tried clearing the camps and they just move elsewhere.
The difference is that they used to jump on lorries to get into the UK and disappear into the black market economy, now they are much more visible as they get picked up and immediately claim asylum and we then have this issue of housing them and taking years to process their claims. Its the same in the US, they have always had lots of people illegal enter, it was that it wasn't the norm to claim asylum it is was to disappear into work.
The government is abolishing NHS England without a clear plan for how it will be achieved and how it will benefit frontline care, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.
The government is abolishing NHS England without a clear plan for how it will be achieved and how it will benefit frontline care, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.
The government is abolishing NHS England without a clear plan for how it will be achieved and how it will benefit frontline care, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.
The government is abolishing NHS England without a clear plan for how it will be achieved and how it will benefit frontline care, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.
It is a bit of a recurring theme isn't it. You would excuse the government if they had won a really surprising victory e.g. Corbyn vs May, but everybody with half a brain knew they were going to win easily. It is certainly nothing like Blair's New Labour victory where agree or disagree with their policies they had thought about what they wanted to try and achieve and how to implement them.
The government is abolishing NHS England without a clear plan for how it will be achieved and how it will benefit frontline care, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.
It's what we've come to expect from all parties in government though.
I don't think that is true. Blair / Brown had a plan, Cameron / Osborne had a plan, Truss did but tried to do it all in one go and spooked the markets, even to some extent Boris did (but that was sent off course by a) COVID and b) Boris being totally unsuitable for the job).
It feels like the only really planning the current government have done is net zero stuff with Miliband and the wheeze of not "raising tax on working people by not increasing IC, NI, VAT", when they clearly planned for employer NI.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
"Peter Sullivan, a man of ‘limited intellectual capacity’ and ‘suggestibility’, has been exonerated after spending 38 years in jail for a murder he didn’t commit. Now aged 68, Sullivan has spent most of his life in high-security jails. DNA evidence has demonstrated that another man was responsible for the brutal assault and murder of 21-year-old Diane Sindall in Birkenhead, Merseyside, in 1986 . How could such a horrific miscarriage of justice happen, and what has Peter endured these past four decades?
After being arrested, Peter was interviewed without any lawyer present, with the police saying that legal advice would have been ‘a hindrance to the enquiry’. At Peter’s appeal this year, Dr Harry Wood, the psychologist who assessed him, said that he was so vulnerable that had the interview taken place today, he would have been accompanied by an ‘appropriate adult’ as well as a lawyer."
Josh O'Connor would make a brilliant doctor. Thinking back to the first 4 doctors, they had a sort of playful but insouciant air about the character, which Josh has brought to every character I have seen him play.
Those odds are awful, adding up to over 400 per cent. 100 per cent is fair; maybe add 20 or even 30 per cent for the bookmaker's profit, but those prices are extortionate. Tbh I'm not even sure that any bookmaker is betting on this – possibly the writer has just made them up.
"Peter Sullivan, a man of ‘limited intellectual capacity’ and ‘suggestibility’, has been exonerated after spending 38 years in jail for a murder he didn’t commit.
Great. That'll be one more fucking Reform voter when he gets out.
That is some serious spin. Pretty much all the measures are a return to the immigration policy under the Tories prior to Boris. And the things like indefinite leave to remain, the headline is 10 years, but there are a load of caveats that mean it can still be 5 for a lot of people.
Again it is being sold as if Starmer is proposing incredibly tough immigration rules where unless you are a noble prize winning scientist you aren't getting in. When it really isn't that at all.
For context when Cameron was talking about immigration being far too high and must get it down to 10k's, it was 300k net. Starmer being spun as like the anti-migrant immigration officer off come fly with me, will at best bring it down to 300k net....
That is some serious spin. Pretty much all the measures are a return to the immigration policy under the Tories prior to Boris. And the things like indefinite leave to remain, the headline is 10 years, but there are a load of caveats that mean it can still be 5 for a lot of people.
Again it is being sold as if Starmer is proposing incredibly tough immigration rules where unless you are a noble prize winning scientist you aren't getting in. When it really isn't that at all.
For context when Cameron was talking about immigration being far too high and must get it down to 10k's, it was 300k net. Starmer being spun as like the anti-migrant immigration officer off come fly with me, will at best bring it down to 300k net....
Usually I agree with your analysis and this is no exception.
"Peter Sullivan, a man of ‘limited intellectual capacity’ and ‘suggestibility’, has been exonerated after spending 38 years in jail for a murder he didn’t commit.
Great. That'll be one more fucking Reform voter when he gets out.
At least it should mean a bit longer till the next header about the infallibility of judges.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
Biden aide hits back at book alleging cover-up of his 'deterioration'
Tapper and Thompson's book also says that Biden did not recognise George Clooney at a star-studded California campaign fundraiser last June hosted by the Hollywood star.
The book also alleges that Biden forgot the names of veteran aides, including trusted loyalist Mike Donilon, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and White House communications director Kate Bedingfield.
“This is amazing, it worked,” said Radwan Ziadeh, a Syrian writer and activist who is close to the Syrian president. He shared a picture of an initial mockup of Trump Tower Damascus. “This is how you win his heart and mind,” he said, noting that Sharaa would probably show Trump the design during their meeting in Riyadh on Wednesday...
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
Not a very good agent if they got caught in one day and attacked places he doesn't live.
"The suspect, whose nationality has not been disclosed,"
Be a bit awkward if it is the Iranians again that came via boat and stayed in a government funded hotel. It is interesting how little coverage this revelation is getting after being reported by Mark White (one of the reliable proper journalists on GB News) and hasn't had the usual racist conspiracy theory much racking response.
The attack has been very successful, as we are talking about it. Oddly, this is true even if the perpetrator is a lone agent.
What Iran, Russia, and our other enemies want is to sow discord, to get us arguing and fighting amongst ourselves. Attacking places linked to the PM - but not the PM directly - is one way of making people feel unsafe, as though the country is out of control. That is useful to our enemies.
A lone agent attack indicates to them that their plans are working, even if they had nothing to do with it.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
It has been interesting how low key the reporting has been really* and Starmer unwillingness to say anything about it. I presume this is very much a deliberate tactic based upon advice.
* yes it has been reported, but its been a background story. You would think attack on house / car of PM would have wall to wall coverage e.g, it isn't on the front page of the BBC website, despite the arrest.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
The original thought in France that it might have been far left anarchist groups as I think they have done stuff like that in the past. But I think that opinion might have changed since then.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
It has been interesting how low key the reporting has been really* and Starmer unwillingness to say anything about it. I presume this is very much a deliberate tactic based upon advice.
* yes it has been reported, but its been a background story. You would think attack on house / car of PM would have wall to wall coverage e.g, it isn't on the front page of the BBC website, despite the arrest.
The fires were on several front pages yesterday iirc. The arrest since then will have triggered sub judice rules, which might be Keir Starmer's specialist subject on Mastermind given his old job.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Why is this news? We all know the objective of the French is a measured shakedown, not to stop them.
They're delighted if they leave the Pas de Calais. And, indeed, that's why they encourage them to congregate there in the first place - in the hope they elope elsewhere.
"Peter Sullivan, a man of ‘limited intellectual capacity’ and ‘suggestibility’, has been exonerated after spending 38 years in jail for a murder he didn’t commit.
Great. That'll be one more fucking Reform voter when he gets out.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Why is this news? We all know the objective of the French is a measured shakedown, not to stop them.
They're delighted if they leave the Pas de Calais. And, indeed, that's why they encourage them to congregate there in the first place - in the hope they elope elsewhere.
And - to be fair - that's what French voters want their government to do.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
It has been interesting how low key the reporting has been really* and Starmer unwillingness to say anything about it. I presume this is very much a deliberate tactic based upon advice.
* yes it has been reported, but its been a background story. You would think attack on house / car of PM would have wall to wall coverage e.g, it isn't on the front page of the BBC website, despite the arrest.
The fires were on several front pages yesterday iirc. The arrest since then will have triggered sub judice rules, which might be Keir Starmer's specialist subject on Mastermind given his old job.
Oh it was certainly reported, but compare the coverage to the endless droning about Enoch Starmer all because he uttered Island of Strangers. I bet if you went out today and polled people a large proportion of people would have no idea that Starmers home and car were firebombed.
Also from the start, Starmer's position was he thanked the fire brigade and had no further comment. Even heart of stone Gordon Brown would have said something human about this under normal circumstances, which points to perhaps something a bit more to it or that more evidence Starmer is quite odd when it comes to things like talking about family i.e. Mr I wouldn't pay for my family to be saved by private medical care.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
Unfortunately, humans like exciting stories with goodies and baddies, and "system fails because they all occasionally fail, roughly in proportion to our collective cheapness" isn't an exciting story.
Worse than that, it implies that failures can only be reduced, not stopped. And the way to reduce failure is to be less cheap. We hate both those conclusions.
It's extremely unlikely to be Russia. An attack on a foreign leader by a nation state is effectively a declaration of war, and he doesn't want to go down the route of a potential hot war between Russia and Western countries.
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
These guys were spraying Novichok all over Salisbury. I don't think they care.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
Russia has allegedly (*) been using third parties to commit crimes in their 'enemy' states. Criminals and criminal groups are one such vector. The Poles have firmly put the blame for a massive mall fire onto the Russians.
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Did they ever get to the bottom of the sabotage of the rail network in France just before the Olympics?
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
I've heard nothing about the French rail sabotage, and wiki indicates that not much (public) progress has been made. It would seem like a perfect target for them, though. Maximum inconvenience and media coverage.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
Unfortunately, humans like exciting stories with goodies and baddies, and "system fails because they all occasionally fail, roughly in proportion to our collective cheapness" isn't an exciting story.
Worse than that, it implies that failures can only be reduced, not stopped. And the way to reduce failure is to be less cheap. We hate both those conclusions.
Other examples abound.
I am not really into conspiracies and to be honest thought nothing more of the Heathrow incident until the report. I just thought it was a bit odd that the report said they still have no idea.
Probably the Russians. Think Salisbury and Litvinenko.
However the Russians are competent, they get the job done and are out the country before people even know it happened. Not firebomb a flat whose address connection to Starmer is because its on companies house because Starmer owns the freehold and get caught within the day.
"The home secretary has told ITV News that the failure of French police to stop migrants crossing the channel is “undermining our border security”.
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
Why is this news? We all know the objective of the French is a measured shakedown, not to stop them.
They're delighted if they leave the Pas de Calais. And, indeed, that's why they encourage them to congregate there in the first place - in the hope they elope elsewhere.
And - to be fair - that's what French voters want their government to do.
This English voter wants their government to reconquer Normandy and the Pas de Calais, and make the French honour the Treaty of Troyes.
That is some serious spin. Pretty much all the measures are a return to the immigration policy under the Tories prior to Boris. And the things like indefinite leave to remain, the headline is 10 years, but there are a load of caveats that mean it can still be 5 for a lot of people.
Again it is being sold as if Starmer is proposing incredibly tough immigration rules where unless you are a noble prize winning scientist you aren't getting in. When it really isn't that at all.
For context when Cameron was talking about immigration being far too high and must get it down to 10k's, it was 300k net. Starmer being spun as like the anti-migrant immigration officer off come fly with me, will at best bring it down to 300k net....
Would the Wizard Earl be a good example of a noble prize winning scientist?
If in doubt, and poisoning is possible, it will be Vlad. why do I suspect that?
In 2004, I wrote a review paper in the scientific literature on the chemistry, toxicogy, and environmental consequences of dibenzodixins and dibenzofurans. I was contacted for advice by the American government and as a consequence, I gave them what they asked for.
All I will say is that I was sent the results of a series of blood analyses that weren't cheap. The question they wanted answering was straightforward and it apears that an important person who suffered from the symptoms of cloracne in 1975 had been deliberately poisoned. OK, the people involved were anonymised but I don't claim to be Sherlock Holmes.
Later that year, they confirmed that the 'world experts' they asked were unanimous. That was nice to know anyway.
Comments
The Berm is one of the most secure defensive barriers ever. It consists of 10-foot-high walls, barbed wire, electric fences and, every seven miles, human sentries. On top of that, the fortification lies amid the world’s longest continuous minefield."
He's not a regular on the BBC, the BBC doesn't need him, time to cut the old anti-Semitic fucker adrift. He reminds me of Roger Waters
And I LOVE Dark Side of the Moon, and always will
"Everest pioneers smoked their way up to the summit
Mountaineers from the golden age of climbing relied almost as heavily on tobacco as they did on ropes and bottled oxygen" (£)
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/article/everest-pioneers-smoked-their-way-up-to-the-summit-mpgkbxsts
https://x.com/politicsjoe_uk/status/1922258319231603090
Police question suspect over arson attack on Keir Starmer’s house
https://www.thetimes.com/article/01f10107-7754-4797-8deb-2356c5ba5818?shareToken=26331e090ae387e9322be12bda8bdada
"Starmer firebombs linked to hostile state
Terror police investigating attacks believe overseas agents could have been involved"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/13/starmer-firebombs-linked-to-hostile-state/
I highly doubt anybody was going bloody hell that Starmer bloke has turned into Enoch Powell.
"The suspect, whose nationality has not been disclosed,"
Be a bit awkward if it is the Iranians again that came via boat and stayed in a government funded hotel. It is interesting how little coverage this revelation is getting after being reported by Mark White (one of the reliable proper journalists on GB News) and hasn't had the usual racist conspiracy theory much racking response.
See for example how Boris “lying to the Queen” and partying while she mourned had fatal consequences for his premiership, or indeed how even one step removed, Trump’s respect/fear of the British monarchy reins him in with us a bit.
I don't think people are going to buy it, anymore than Tory attempts to paint him as some dangerous radical did, it just isn't very plausible.
https://chatgpt.com/share/6823c1ba-f918-8013-836c-67b920bf2e3e
The GPT line that made me giggle was :
"What does emerge is a sector-wide pattern: universities have responded to financial pressures largely by reducing staff costs (often the single biggest expense) rather than by cutting top salaries."
:: shocked face pikachu ::
INVADE! INVADE!
Yvette Cooper said footage of officers failing to apprehend migrants on the coast of France was “not what we want to see”.
On Tuesday morning, ITV News filmed dozens of people getting onto an overcrowded dinghy in Dunkirk, on the French coast, to make the dangerous journey across the Channel.
The dinghy came close to the shore multiple times and stayed for up to 20 minutes to pick up more passengers waiting, with no police stopping them."
https://www.itv.com/news/2025-05-13/not-what-we-want-to-see-home-secretary-responds-to-migrant-crossings-video
When she was a bit livelier than she is now she often repeated that "I want to be dead".
Did she mean it? I believe so - but unfortunately, no court or euthanasia scheme would have been able to act on it because she would have failed any tests. In the past when compus mentis she would definitely have argued for the option but choosing the right timing is impossible.
I don't know how we solve this problem, save for finding out what causes Alzheimer's in the first place. This might prove easier than navigating the moral dilemmas.
Scottish euthanasia bill passes, but not by huge majority.
On topic: It's time to move on from Boris.
Off topic: Hasn't the weather been amazing? 😎
I'm even surprised that the Iranians are potentially involved. If Iranian involved is confirmed then the UK would be expected to retaliate militarily. (Although, I'm unsure whether Starmer would actually retaliate or whether he'd chicken out of a confrontation.)
And a week more to come. I am going out every evening.
It could be a super complex case where some state actor has radicalised someone online into a false flag by proxy. Rile up some pro-Gaza or pro-Reform numpty on twitter, try to stoke a culture war. The obvious is a quid pro quo by the Iranians, but my logic is rarely right in stuff like this.
And I thought Starmer and Donald were getting on so well.
The ANC say they want a multi racial S Africa but aren't doing much to help that with these Mugable like farm confiscations and Trump has correctly offered farming families still there at risk of losing their farms an exit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=rOE5_OTDBsY&themeRefresh=1
The level of racism and hatred, around Calais, against the would be migrants, is pretty startling. I’m taking about comments that would have Tommy Lot Of Names saying “bit much”.
Our cretinous police must answer for their tyrannical behaviour in court
The force that arrested retired officer Julian Foulkes over a ‘thought crime’ tweet has to face justice" (£)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/13/cretinous-police-must-answer-for-their-tyrannical-behaviour/
The difference is that they used to jump on lorries to get into the UK and disappear into the black market economy, now they are much more visible as they get picked up and immediately claim asylum and we then have this issue of housing them and taking years to process their claims. Its the same in the US, they have always had lots of people illegal enter, it was that it wasn't the norm to claim asylum it is was to disappear into work.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g23m22x22o
It feels like the only really planning the current government have done is net zero stuff with Miliband and the wheeze of not "raising tax on working people by not increasing IC, NI, VAT", when they clearly planned for employer NI.
https://www.gambling.com/uk/news/doctor-who-betting-odds
After being arrested, Peter was interviewed without any lawyer present, with the police saying that legal advice would have been ‘a hindrance to the enquiry’. At Peter’s appeal this year, Dr Harry Wood, the psychologist who assessed him, said that he was so vulnerable that had the interview taken place today, he would have been accompanied by an ‘appropriate adult’ as well as a lawyer."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-injustice-of-peter-sullivans-wrongful-conviction/
Kemi Badenoch has no response – and her MPs are restless.
By Rachel Cunliffe"
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2025/05/on-immigration-labour-are-doing-what-the-tories-only-dreamed-of
Again it is being sold as if Starmer is proposing incredibly tough immigration rules where unless you are a noble prize winning scientist you aren't getting in. When it really isn't that at all.
For context when Cameron was talking about immigration being far too high and must get it down to 10k's, it was 300k net. Starmer being spun as like the anti-migrant immigration officer off come fly with me, will at best bring it down to 300k net....
"Russia is orchestrating a campaign of sabotage attacks in Europe, with some targets linked to the war in Ukraine but others picked at random with the aim of sowing chaos. Investigators have also linked Russia to arson attacks in Lithuania and the UK."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/12/poland-to-close-russian-consulate-krakow-warsaw-shopping-centre-fire
We are at war. It is mainly a cold war at the moment, but we are all being far too complacent about the situation we are in, and where we are heading.
(*) I think it's pretty much a certainty.
Biden aide hits back at book alleging cover-up of his 'deterioration'
Tapper and Thompson's book also says that Biden did not recognise George Clooney at a star-studded California campaign fundraiser last June hosted by the Hollywood star.
The book also alleges that Biden forgot the names of veteran aides, including trusted loyalist Mike Donilon, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and White House communications director Kate Bedingfield.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g23zzl1gwo
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/13/us-saudi-arabia-arms-deal-trump-meeting-syria
..Though the details of the sanctions relief were still unclear, Sharaa’s team in Damascus was celebrating.
“This is amazing, it worked,” said Radwan Ziadeh, a Syrian writer and activist who is close to the Syrian president. He shared a picture of an initial mockup of Trump Tower Damascus. “This is how you win his heart and mind,” he said, noting that Sharaa would probably show Trump the design during their meeting in Riyadh on Wednesday...
And the heathrow power outage, despite Miliband confidently saying it definitely wasn't any sort of attack, I believe the subsequent investigation failed to conclude what caused it.
What Iran, Russia, and our other enemies want is to sow discord, to get us arguing and fighting amongst ourselves. Attacking places linked to the PM - but not the PM directly - is one way of making people feel unsafe, as though the country is out of control. That is useful to our enemies.
A lone agent attack indicates to them that their plans are working, even if they had nothing to do with it.
But as for the Heathrow power outrage: I think that was an utterly bog-standard 'accident'. Infrastructure sometimes fails, especially old infrastructure, and redundant systems also occasionally fail. IMO it was not deliberate.
* yes it has been reported, but its been a background story. You would think attack on house / car of PM would have wall to wall coverage e.g, it isn't on the front page of the BBC website, despite the arrest.
They're delighted if they leave the Pas de Calais. And, indeed, that's why they encourage them to congregate there in the first place - in the hope they elope elsewhere.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyrjnv859no
Also from the start, Starmer's position was he thanked the fire brigade and had no further comment. Even heart of stone Gordon Brown would have said something human about this under normal circumstances, which points to perhaps something a bit more to it or that more evidence Starmer is quite odd when it comes to things like talking about family i.e. Mr I wouldn't pay for my family to be saved by private medical care.
Worse than that, it implies that failures can only be reduced, not stopped. And the way to reduce failure is to be less cheap. We hate both those conclusions.
Other examples abound.
In 2004, I wrote a review paper in the scientific literature on the chemistry, toxicogy, and environmental consequences of dibenzodixins and dibenzofurans. I was contacted for advice by the American government and as a consequence, I gave them what they asked for.
All I will say is that I was sent the results of a series of blood analyses that weren't cheap. The question they wanted answering was straightforward and it apears that an important person who suffered from the symptoms of cloracne in 1975 had been deliberately poisoned. OK, the people involved were anonymised but I don't claim to be Sherlock Holmes.
Later that year, they confirmed that the 'world experts' they asked were unanimous. That was nice to know anyway.