"Eastbourne's international tennis event downgraded
Caroline Ansell, the MP for Eastbourne, said the change will "challenging", adding: "It wasn’t what I wanted to hear." The downgrade is as a result of the LTA achieving its aim of staging a women's tournament at Queen's Club, in west London, in the first week of the grass court season."
I hadn't realised that Queens was running a WTA event this week. Grass court season is short, and I expert there will be plenty of top 100 women at Eastbourne too, as its the last chance on grass before Wimbledon. A most of the top 100 are essentially interchangeable (tall, leggy, usually blond).*
*Mostly joking but there is a bit of truth in there. I reckon most people would struggle to name more than two or three womens tennis players and as for identifying them...
A distillation of the PB debates on the topic. It's currently the second most read item on BBC news.
There are a couple of problems with the "lets just changing the pricing structure in some way" solutions to our very high energy prices.
The first is the most obvious. If we go for a regional pricing structure, whilst it's good news for those in areas with lots of windmills and few people, and bad news for people elsewhere, unless this results in a significant movement of demand, the lack of wires from Scotland to the SE will remain exactly the same.
I'm not sure there is going to be much movement in demand - people are not going to be upping sticks and moving to Scotland from Essex to save £500 a year off their electric bill. Things like data centers also tend to hang out where customers are for obvious reasons. Heavy industry is expensive to move for any number of reasons, not least planning. Try getting planning permission for a new steelworks somewhere, and see how you get on!
The second (and much larger) problem is that if we were to magically decouple electric prices from gas prices, and so prices are set by the marginal cost of renewables, who would build another windfarm? Wind may be free, but collecting energy from it requires loads of really expensive infrastructure, very little of it maintenance free. Gas is free too, it just requires very expensive infrastructure to get it out of the ground. Everyone in business requires a return on investment, otherwise that investment will not be made.
That said, one of the biggest mistakes in the whole energy market was curtailment payments - the deal should be that if we don't want power from your windfarm, the grid doesn't take it - period. If you really want or need to dump your excess power into the grid (e.g. some thermal plant, where cycling for short periods isn't viable), pricing should just go negative. Curtailment payments provide perverse incentives to build windfarms in places without adequate grid infrastructure.
Possible the best fix would be abolishing curtailment payments, but letting private companies build additional grid connectors (which they would charge the system to use). That would incentivise the owners of wind farms to build their own grid links, rather than the current model of privatising the profits (which accrue to the windfarm owners) and socialising the costs (as national grid charges all of us for putting in the additional grid infrastructure).
If we are serious about all this, we also need to nuke the planning system so pretty much anyone can put up pylons anywhere. People won't like it, but this isn't a having cake and eating it option - if we want to completely rebase power generation in the country we can't do it without putting in the necessary infrastructure.
S Korea reforested 70% of its landmass last century. We should do something along those lines.
We are
An entertainment is to suggest to Green types that we should fill in the Norfolk Broads (remains of mad strip mining for peat) or reforest the Lake District.
Reforesting large parts of the Lakes is not a daft idea. But not with conifers.
Yes. The balance is entirely wrong. But this requires large areas without sheep. The mixed natural(ish) woodland there is the LDNP is a magical and well used resource. But for all sorts of cultural, touristic and practical reasons we need to preserve large areas of what the district has become, with its large expanses of rock and unpland grass, but which is also something of a nature desert.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. It is never justified or necessary. Peace is possible, but it will require Israel to stop building settlements on Palestinian land, stop Israel invading its neighbour's territory and stop Israel dehumanising the Palestinian population.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
War crimes are being committed by both sides. Of the two, the greater are now those being committed by Israel, which appears to have a policy of, at the minimum, expelling the Palestinian population of Gaza and, perhaps, given the starvation blockade, simply killing off 2 million people or a substantial proportion of them.
For those who say 'but it's a war; nasty stuff happens', yes: that's why there are rules under international law. Sometimes innocent civilians get killed in wars, especially urban wars and even more so urban wars where one side is using civilian infrastructure as shields (and the other doesn't care that they are). That is to be expected and, while deaths should be minimised where possible, armed forces still have to be able to engage the enemy. However, the deliberate starvation of a nation is a war crime and occupying powers - which Israel now is - have duties to the civilians under their control.
Yet no-one gets worked up about the Russians doing much worse in Ukraine, most bizarre.
I think people do. But the West is arming Ukraine to try to enable them to push back/defend and limit these atrocities. More could be done, but Russia is roundly condemned and there is (some) international action against Russia.
Part of the reason why there is so much angst about Gaza is due to the substantial lack of help for the Gaza residents (and also the limited criticism of Israel and substantial lack of more than words on that, plus the role of the West in supplying arms to Israel).
(I'm not - obviously, I hope! - suggesting arming Hamas or anyone else in Gaza).
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
War crimes are being committed by both sides. Of the two, the greater are now those being committed by Israel, which appears to have a policy of, at the minimum, expelling the Palestinian population of Gaza and, perhaps, given the starvation blockade, simply killing off 2 million people or a substantial proportion of them.
For those who say 'but it's a war; nasty stuff happens', yes: that's why there are rules under international law. Sometimes innocent civilians get killed in wars, especially urban wars and even more so urban wars where one side is using civilian infrastructure as shields (and the other doesn't care that they are). That is to be expected and, while deaths should be minimised where possible, armed forces still have to be able to engage the enemy. However, the deliberate starvation of a nation is a war crime and occupying powers - which Israel now is - have duties to the civilians under their control.
Yet no-one gets worked up about the Russians doing much worse in Ukraine, most bizarre.
Are we not worked up? Is our military not training Ukranian soldiers a few miles from where I live? Have we not send aid and weapons continuously? Are we hosting Ukranian refugees?
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
So much for the BBC's rigorous demand for balance.
Davie and Gibb are a real problem for Starmer (and for the impartiality of the BBC). Starmer can do something about this immediately. The headlines are going to be terrible anyway, so take the shots.
In what way is it *not* balance to seek to broadcast stories of interest to people of all political persuasions?
Interestingly that byline times article gave no indication of *how* they intend to change their output. Their is a distinct strand of BBC drama and factual reporting about immigrants encountering British racism. These likely engenders cries of "How shocking" from progressives and eye-rolls from Reform types. Do they think increasing this output will convince the Reformists or reducing it will placate them?
1979, 1997, 2010, 2024. These changes don’t come around often. I expect a much reduced Labour majority good for 5 more years.
Me too.
#tenyearkeir
And before that period of stability: 1964, 1970, 1974, 1979. Trends change too.
But more importantly, the whole party structure is in flux at the moment. We would be better looking to 1918-31 for precedent rather than 1945-2010.
Also, in 1979, 1997 and 2010 then new government came in with a clear critique of what was wrong with the country and a plan laid out in advance and in depth as to what they would do to fix it, with an explanation of how that would work and why it was necessary. They then did that and reaped their reward at the next election (even in 1983, when the result was clearly boosted by the Falklands, opinion was already shifting back to the Tories before the invasion). But with Labour this time there's been barely such analysis nor attempt at meaningful reform. As such, it feels more like 1974, with a derisory attempt to reboot a status quo. (1964 and 1970 can be marked down in a third category of 'we had a plan and screwed it up').
Yes. I know they had to get elected and all that, but if by now and from Day 1 Labour had been ruthlessly honest, gave simple answers to questions, set out a plan, raised key taxes, started running things really well, put communication geniuses in charge of telling the story, stopped blaming the past and told us our glass was half full and getting fuller they would be in a better position.
People will not vote for a negative account of who we are, where we came from and where we are going.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
War crimes are being committed by both sides. Of the two, the greater are now those being committed by Israel, which appears to have a policy of, at the minimum, expelling the Palestinian population of Gaza and, perhaps, given the starvation blockade, simply killing off 2 million people or a substantial proportion of them.
For those who say 'but it's a war; nasty stuff happens', yes: that's why there are rules under international law. Sometimes innocent civilians get killed in wars, especially urban wars and even more so urban wars where one side is using civilian infrastructure as shields (and the other doesn't care that they are). That is to be expected and, while deaths should be minimised where possible, armed forces still have to be able to engage the enemy. However, the deliberate starvation of a nation is a war crime and occupying powers - which Israel now is - have duties to the civilians under their control.
Yet no-one gets worked up about the Russians doing much worse in Ukraine, most bizarre.
Actually I thought lots of people are getting worked up about the Russians. Hence the reason we have been supplying the Ukrainians with weapons and have laid charges at the ICC against Putin and his cronies.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
War crimes are being committed by both sides. Of the two, the greater are now those being committed by Israel, which appears to have a policy of, at the minimum, expelling the Palestinian population of Gaza and, perhaps, given the starvation blockade, simply killing off 2 million people or a substantial proportion of them.
For those who say 'but it's a war; nasty stuff happens', yes: that's why there are rules under international law. Sometimes innocent civilians get killed in wars, especially urban wars and even more so urban wars where one side is using civilian infrastructure as shields (and the other doesn't care that they are). That is to be expected and, while deaths should be minimised where possible, armed forces still have to be able to engage the enemy. However, the deliberate starvation of a nation is a war crime and occupying powers - which Israel now is - have duties to the civilians under their control.
Yet no-one gets worked up about the Russians doing much worse in Ukraine, most bizarre.
Analysis that one form of pure evil is preferable to another form of pure evil is quite strange.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
Directly? Not sure. Perhaps a step too far down the conspiracy theory route.
Indirectly? Absolutely. He was the one who openly stated that Israel should support Hamas against the more moderate Palestinian authority as a means of undermining any prospect of a Two State solution. He was the one who encouraged foreign governments to direct funding towards Hamas rather than the Authority. He did this in the clear knowledge of who and what they were since it suited his political aims.
He absolutely carries some of the blame personally for Hamas being able to launch the October 7th attacks.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
You replied to a post referring to Netanyahu by immediately.conflating him with Israel. In any case I’d imagine someone who conspired to support Hamas and was in ultimate command of Israel’s security on October 7th would have a few questions to answer. Lots of Israelis seem to agree.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
War crimes are being committed by both sides. Of the two, the greater are now those being committed by Israel, which appears to have a policy of, at the minimum, expelling the Palestinian population of Gaza and, perhaps, given the starvation blockade, simply killing off 2 million people or a substantial proportion of them.
For those who say 'but it's a war; nasty stuff happens', yes: that's why there are rules under international law. Sometimes innocent civilians get killed in wars, especially urban wars and even more so urban wars where one side is using civilian infrastructure as shields (and the other doesn't care that they are). That is to be expected and, while deaths should be minimised where possible, armed forces still have to be able to engage the enemy. However, the deliberate starvation of a nation is a war crime and occupying powers - which Israel now is - have duties to the civilians under their control.
Yet no-one gets worked up about the Russians doing much worse in Ukraine, most bizarre.
The excessive focus on Palestine compared with other wars is a bugbear of mine too. Still, human rights there matter as much as anywhere.
Yes, the Russians are doing and have done dreadful things in Ukraine. I have been consistent on the need for Russia to be defeated in that war in no small part because of those actions (which would be applied elsewhere in Russia's next war if they get away with it in Ukraine), and once Russia is kicked out, the need for a deRussification of the recovered country.
https://x.com/kimleadbeater/status/1931461567444648042?s=19 Leadbeter let her true feelings on assisted out over the weekend - clearly wants far far more than the current bill before parliament (which would not have allowed the suicide of the couple she references)
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Except he Tamil people were allowed to remain citizens of Sri Lanka. Tamil is still an Official Language of Sri Lanka.
1979, 1997, 2010, 2024. These changes don’t come around often. I expect a much reduced Labour majority good for 5 more years.
Me too.
#tenyearkeir
And before that period of stability: 1964, 1970, 1974, 1979. Trends change too.
But more importantly, the whole party structure is in flux at the moment. We would be better looking to 1918-31 for precedent rather than 1945-2010.
Also, in 1979, 1997 and 2010 then new government came in with a clear critique of what was wrong with the country and a plan laid out in advance and in depth as to what they would do to fix it, with an explanation of how that would work and why it was necessary. They then did that and reaped their reward at the next election (even in 1983, when the result was clearly boosted by the Falklands, opinion was already shifting back to the Tories before the invasion). But with Labour this time there's been barely such analysis nor attempt at meaningful reform. As such, it feels more like 1974, with a derisory attempt to reboot a status quo. (1964 and 1970 can be marked down in a third category of 'we had a plan and screwed it up').
Yes, there has never been a more fragile landslide majority than this one. I do make them favs for largest party next time but I'm not remotely tempted at 2.5.
Just wanted to type "tenyearkeir"
Going back to my earlier parallel, 1918 and 1922 were both pretty fragile landslide majorities (1922 was more 'solid majority' than outright landslide but the moderate sized overall majority was increased in reality by how divided the opposition was - not that it helped Baldwin much in the end).
So much for the BBC's rigorous demand for balance.
Davie and Gibb are a real problem for Starmer (and for the impartiality of the BBC). Starmer can do something about this immediately. The headlines are going to be terrible anyway, so take the shots.
In what way is it *not* balance to seek to broadcast stories of interest to people of all political persuasions?
It's hilarious watching the liberal left attacking the BBC when it doesn't dance to their tune. Irony doesn't do it justice.
https://x.com/kimleadbeater/status/1931461567444648042?s=19 Leadbeter let her true feelings on assisted out over the weekend - clearly wants far far more than the current bill before parliament (which would not have allowed the suicide of the couple she references)
Old, confused, out of touch with the modern world, just wanting it all to end?
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
You replied to a post referring to Netanyahu by immediately.conflating him with Israel. In any case I’d imagine someone who conspired to support Hamas and was in ultimate command of Israel’s security on October 7th would have a few questions to answer. Lots of Israelis seem to agree.
Hang on, even if Netanyahu wasn't in charge of Israel, someone else would be having to deal with the hostage situation. My guess is, they would not be begging Hamas to release them and offering to do whatever it takes.
1979, 1997, 2010, 2024. These changes don’t come around often. I expect a much reduced Labour majority good for 5 more years.
Me too.
#tenyearkeir
And before that period of stability: 1964, 1970, 1974, 1979. Trends change too.
But more importantly, the whole party structure is in flux at the moment. We would be better looking to 1918-31 for precedent rather than 1945-2010.
Also, in 1979, 1997 and 2010 then new government came in with a clear critique of what was wrong with the country and a plan laid out in advance and in depth as to what they would do to fix it, with an explanation of how that would work and why it was necessary. They then did that and reaped their reward at the next election (even in 1983, when the result was clearly boosted by the Falklands, opinion was already shifting back to the Tories before the invasion). But with Labour this time there's been barely such analysis nor attempt at meaningful reform. As such, it feels more like 1974, with a derisory attempt to reboot a status quo. (1964 and 1970 can be marked down in a third category of 'we had a plan and screwed it up').
Yes. I know they had to get elected and all that, but if by now and from Day 1 Labour had been ruthlessly honest, gave simple answers to questions, set out a plan, raised key taxes, started running things really well, put communication geniuses in charge of telling the story, stopped blaming the past and told us our glass was half full and getting fuller they would be in a better position.
People will not vote for a negative account of who we are, where we came from and where we are going.
I agree. And the earlier examples were all instances where the opposition *was* honest about making unpopular individual decisions but still got elected anyway because they'd persuaded the country not only of the need for change but that their change was the right one - and having set the terms of the debate, that made it so much easier in 4-5 years time to mark their own homework.
Labour's problem now (and the Tories even more so) is that having not set the terms of the debate they are now hamstrung by Reform setting it. Also, with only the Lib Dems rejecting it and arguing an alternative baseline, both red and blue risk losing support to Gold as well as Turquoise.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
Have they assassinated Thumberg yet by mistake?
No, they've intercepted her selfie boat and are escorting her to show her videos of the 7 October Hamas atrocities.
Perhaps you could do with seeing the same videos.
You think it is ok for a government to board a ship in international waters?
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
Earlier you differentiated between Hamas and "Bibi's Israel" by suggesting Israel at least look after their own. My counterpoint was that his treatment of the hostages suggests that is not the case. There was no direct or indirect implication from me that Hamas are the good guys. Netanyahu was entirely entitled to chase down Hamas, but killing them alongside the hostages is a choice that denies your analysis.
As to your question is "Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October"? Some have suggested that by promoting and cultivating Hamas as a means of suppressing Gazans for two decades mean his hands are not clean over October 7th.
A distillation of the PB debates on the topic. It's currently the second most read item on BBC news.
There are a couple of problems with the "lets just changing the pricing structure in some way" solutions to our very high energy prices.
The first is the most obvious. If we go for a regional pricing structure, whilst it's good news for those in areas with lots of windmills and few people, and bad news for people elsewhere, unless this results in a significant movement of demand, the lack of wires from Scotland to the SE will remain exactly the same.
I'm not sure there is going to be much movement in demand - people are not going to be upping sticks and moving to Scotland from Essex to save £500 a year off their electric bill. Things like data centers also tend to hang out where customers are for obvious reasons. Heavy industry is expensive to move for any number of reasons, not least planning. Try getting planning permission for a new steelworks somewhere, and see how you get on!
The second (and much larger) problem is that if we were to magically decouple electric prices from gas prices, and so prices are set by the marginal cost of renewables, who would build another windfarm? Wind may be free, but collecting energy from it requires loads of really expensive infrastructure, very little of it maintenance free. Gas is free too, it just requires very expensive infrastructure to get it out of the ground. Everyone in business requires a return on investment, otherwise that investment will not be made.
That said, one of the biggest mistakes in the whole energy market was curtailment payments - the deal should be that if we don't want power from your windfarm, the grid doesn't take it - period. If you really want or need to dump your excess power into the grid (e.g. some thermal plant, where cycling for short periods isn't viable), pricing should just go negative. Curtailment payments provide perverse incentives to build windfarms in places without adequate grid infrastructure.
Possible the best fix would be abolishing curtailment payments, but letting private companies build additional grid connectors (which they would charge the system to use). That would incentivise the owners of wind farms to build their own grid links, rather than the current model of privatising the profits (which accrue to the windfarm owners) and socialising the costs (as national grid charges all of us for putting in the additional grid infrastructure).
If we are serious about all this, we also need to nuke the planning system so pretty much anyone can put up pylons anywhere. People won't like it, but this isn't a having cake and eating it option - if we want to completely rebase power generation in the country we can't do it without putting in the necessary infrastructure.
That's a good critique. I think I have more faith in the market to respond to low energy prices though, particularly those firms that can quickly adjust energy consumption.
CfD contracts would mean energy isn't massively cheaper than now because we guarantee a price to renewable generators to stimulate investment - but that does mean we are much less vulnerable to energy shocks like Ukraine, because that element of our consumption is protected.
Linking the value of those contracts to regional pricing would mean more investment closer to population centres, reducing transmission costs. At a domestic level, it would also mean the proliferation of solar across the Highlands would slow, and increase in the central belt. That seems like a good outcome too..
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. It is never justified or necessary. Peace is possible, but it will require Israel to stop building settlements on Palestinian land, stop Israel invading its neighbour's territory and stop Israel dehumanising the Palestinian population.
And what should Hamas do? You've conveniently forgotten their role completely.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
Earlier you differentiated between Hamas and "Bibi's Israel" by suggesting Israel at least look after their own. My counterpoint was that his treatment of the hostages suggests that is not the case. There was no direct or indirect implication from me that Hamas are the good guys. Netanyahu was entirely entitled to chase down Hamas, but killing them alongside the hostages is a choice that denies your analysis.
As to your question is "Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October"? Some have suggested that by promoting and cultivating Hamas as a means of suppressing Gazans for two decades mean his hands are not clean over October 7th.
I'm sorry, but whoever was PM of Israel, they'd be doing whatever they could to get the hostages back. They would not be surrendering to Hamas to do so.
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. It is never justified or necessary. Peace is possible, but it will require Israel to stop building settlements on Palestinian land, stop Israel invading its neighbour's territory and stop Israel dehumanising the Palestinian population.
And what should Hamas do? You've conveniently forgotten their role completely.
Hamas are a lawless guerilla group who happen to claim to speak for a displaced nation. They are a mafia organisation.
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I'd like to know why the Democrats decided to become soft on illegal immigration in the first place when most of their traditional voters wouldn't have been in favour of such a policy.
https://x.com/kimleadbeater/status/1931461567444648042?s=19 Leadbeter let her true feelings on assisted out over the weekend - clearly wants far far more than the current bill before parliament (which would not have allowed the suicide of the couple she references)
Old, confused, out of touch with the modern world, just wanting it all to end?
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. It is never justified or necessary. Peace is possible, but it will require Israel to stop building settlements on Palestinian land, stop Israel invading its neighbour's territory and stop Israel dehumanising the Palestinian population.
And what should Hamas do? You've conveniently forgotten their role completely.
Hamas are a lawless guerilla group who happen to claim to speak for a displaced nation. They are a mafia organisation.
But not quite as lawless as the ISIS militia who are Bibi’s current besties. In fact law abidance seems very low down Netanyahu’s priorities as can be seen from the behaviour of Israeli settlers and security forces in the West Bank, and indeed Bibi’s own endless trial on charges of fraud, bribery and corruption,
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
Earlier you differentiated between Hamas and "Bibi's Israel" by suggesting Israel at least look after their own. My counterpoint was that his treatment of the hostages suggests that is not the case. There was no direct or indirect implication from me that Hamas are the good guys. Netanyahu was entirely entitled to chase down Hamas, but killing them alongside the hostages is a choice that denies your analysis.
As to your question is "Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October"? Some have suggested that by promoting and cultivating Hamas as a means of suppressing Gazans for two decades mean his hands are not clean over October 7th.
I'm sorry, but whoever was PM of Israel, they'd be doing whatever they could to get the hostages back. They would not be surrendering to Hamas to do so.
That would appear not to be true of Bibi. His primary interest seems to be keeping himself out of the Israeli courts.
Who is suggesting Israel should surrender to Hamas? I am not. I am simply refuting your argument that suggests Netanyahu gives two shiny ones about retrieving live hostages. Just ask the hostage families.
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I'd like to know why the Democrats decided to become soft on illegal immigration in the first place when most of their traditional voters wouldn't have been in favour of such a policy.
A lot of the cases we hear about have been living and working in the US for 20 or more years.
Posse commitatus about to get tested to the limit in LA it seems
It's the entire good chap theory of government. A President who is not a good chap can simply ignore the law and worry about the details later.
Indeed. What worries me is that it may simply be a means of shifting what seems possible, by the means of, in a modern visual media society, various noticed spectacles first, then the political changes later.
This is was Debord was onto, and what some Trumpists seem to understand, much better than the modern American Democrats, or progressives.
As an aside, when I was younger I wanted to go into tunnelling (*). One thing that amazes me still is that they can drill tunnels for many miles and end up only a few centimetres out of line. Even in ye olden days, where they often dug tunnels from shafts every few hundred yards, and dug small initial drifts instead of the full tunnel, it was amazing.
But the really amazing thing are the maps of mines, e.g. coal. Not only do they show, to apparently quite high accuracy, the position of the workings, but they can also be objects of beauty. And all done manually, without modern stuff like lasers.
(Somewhere I've got a book on surveying for tunnellers, written in Victorian times.)
Incidentally, there's an online official map of all known old coal workings. I particularly like the ones to the west of Buxton in the Peak District, where the hollows in the ground are still well fenced off.
(*) Yes, I wanted to bore as a profession. Now it's just a hobby...
Wow, thanks for that.
I didn't know the coal seam maps were online now - we'd only seen the paper maps in passing in the local authority planning department (or on the wall in the actual colliery!)
As an example of the random stuff it explains we recently surveyed a field in an area of surface mined coal. One corner of the field had a reasonably rare indicator (Adder's Tongue) of old grasslands growing in the amenity grass and it was a bit of a head scratcher.
It turns out that particular corner of the field was not surface mined whereas the rest was. We had assumed that it was all restored.
These maps should have been online years ago but it is good to see them now.
PS It also shows a recent deep mine panel under the part of Fishlake that flooded. You can see the subsidence on the EA Lidar but it is subtle and not clearly delineated but this makes it quite clear.
Let's hope Britain's favourite chef can find a solution that does not involve bankrupting LEAs with minicab bills. It is a serious issue affecting 10 to 15 per cent in each class, apparently.
This is why Labour WON’T win in 2028. The anger about this kind of stuff is off the dial
You've just noticed? Some of us have been talking about the political traps in home allocation for yonks.
I’ve discussed it before. I’ve noticed this on my own street
But here it is in hard numbers. The sense that native Brits are being taxed to death to benefit foreigners is going to KILL Labour. And if you “worry about” the influx of migrants? - that means you’re radicalised, according to Prevent
Posse commitatus about to get tested to the limit in LA it seems
It's the entire good chap theory of government. A President who is not a good chap can simply ignore the law and worry about the details later.
What always surprises me is that he ends his tirades with "Thank you for your attendance to this matter."
It does always amuse me how he signs off like that. It sounds like some functionary over a mic in a factory asking janitorial staff to clear up a spillage rather than the “Leader of the Free World” making some new batshit statement.
Newsom: We talked for 20 minutes, this issue never came up. I kept trying to talk about LA, he wanted to talk about all these other issues. He never once brought up the national guard. He’s a stone cold liar
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I'd like to know why the Democrats decided to become soft on illegal immigration in the first place when most of their traditional voters wouldn't have been in favour of such a policy.
A lot of the cases we hear about have been living and working in the US for 20 or more years.
That argument is rarely applied to murderers for example. “He committed the crime 20 years ago.. let's forget it "
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
This kind of thing has been the obvious Trump play since the election. The goal is to destabilize blue states, reward the base with images of violence and state power being exercised over people they hate, and potentially open an opportunity for martial law and the further erosion of constitutional safeguards. Anyone surprised by this has been paying zero attention to what the MAGA project is really about.
“Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest,” Reeves said. (Guardian)
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
If your total income is above £35k I presume they will just adjust your tax code to take some extra tax
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
As I say, my income from assorted pensions is around £35,000.However my wife also has a work as well as an OAP. Will she get it and I don't?
There is no savings test, which I appreciate would add a complication, but I assume an awful lot of wealthy pensioners do not rely on an income. We don't. I am by most interpretations exceedingly well off, but I am now going to get the WFA because I don't take my defined contribution pension yet because I don't need it.
I am taking 5 overseas holidays this year, yet I will be getting help with my heating. Madness.
And £35k (or presumably £70k per couple) is an awful lot of money. It is difficult to believe people on this income need help with heating even without substantial savings.
PS Haven't checked the details so reacting to the comments posted on PB.
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
As I say, my income from assorted pensions is around £35,000.However my wife also has a work as well as an OAP. Will she get it and I don't?
Just a point
It was per pensioner household so over 80's receive £150 each so only £150 subject to each pensioners tax
Unless Reeves has extended it to all pensioners but I doubt it
That’s surely the end of Reeves. How can she continue? You can’t have a laughable Chancellor. It’s the one office that needs to be serious to the point of dullness
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
Yes. Reichstag fire moment to come. This is a practice.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Not distinguishing between Netanyahu and Israel? Rookie error.
You think Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October?
You replied to a post referring to Netanyahu by immediately.conflating him with Israel. In any case I’d imagine someone who conspired to support Hamas and was in ultimate command of Israel’s security on October 7th would have a few questions to answer. Lots of Israelis seem to agree.
Hang on, even if Netanyahu wasn't in charge of Israel, someone else would be having to deal with the hostage situation. My guess is, they would not be begging Hamas to release them and offering to do whatever it takes.
Well we know what at least one former leader thinks.
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
As I say, my income from assorted pensions is around £35,000.However my wife also has a work as well as an OAP. Will she get it and I don't?
Just a point
It was per pensioner household so over 80's receive £150 each so only £150 subject to each pensioners tax
Unless Reeves has extended it to all pensioners but I doubt it
Gov.uk says if you live with someone then "one of you" will get the payment (assuming eligible).
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
Yes. Reichstag fire moment to come. This is a practice.
The hyperbole on this is off the scale. Conditions in 1933 in Germany were rather different to those in the USA 2025. For one thing the National Guard is not the SA or the SS. Secondly the USA is comprised on individual states in a way that Germany wasn't (someone will no doubt argue the toss on this, but Bavaria, say, was not as independent a state as Los Angeles is). And even in Germany new votes were held (albeit with some parties banned). Do you think that the Trump administration could really achieve a block on mid term elections? If you do, then you have clearly risen early, gone to the off licence, bought and consumed an awful lot of booze.
There is no savings test, which I appreciate would add a complication, but I assume an awful lot of wealthy pensioners do not rely on an income. We don't. I am by most interpretations exceedingly well off, but I am now going to get the WFA because I don't take my defined contribution pension yet because I don't need it.
I am taking 5 overseas holidays this year, yet I will be getting help with my heating. Madness.
And £35k (or presumably £70k per couple) is an awful lot of money. It is difficult to believe people on this income need help with heating even without substantial savings.
They don't. But folding it into the tax code is probably a crude but effective proxy. And it does set a bit of a Pooh Trap; is anyone going to still say that everyone should get it?
It's bad policy, yes. But there is a limit to how much good policy is compatible with electoral success. And pensioners have blooming good PR. Unfortunately, poor children in large families don't.
With Keir Starmer saying the Government needs to provide clarity soon on winter fuel allowance eligibility. Where do the public think the cut off for eligibility should be? A majority think the cut off should be pensioners on incomes higher than £50,000 (or no cut off at all).
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
As I say, my income from assorted pensions is around £35,000.However my wife also has a work as well as an OAP. Will she get it and I don't?
Just a point
It was per pensioner household so over 80's receive £150 each so only £150 subject to each pensioners tax
Unless Reeves has extended it to all pensioners but I doubt it
So my wife and I will each get it, but my income tax will be increased to recoup mine?
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
As I say, my income from assorted pensions is around £35,000.However my wife also has a work as well as an OAP. Will she get it and I don't?
Just a point
It was per pensioner household so over 80's receive £150 each so only £150 subject to each pensioners tax
Unless Reeves has extended it to all pensioners but I doubt it
Gov.uk says if you live with someone then "one of you" will get the payment (assuming eligible).
So how are they going to sort that mess out?
No idea - what a mess
Reeves having a car crash interview with Sky's just now
We have an announcement on Winter Fuel Payments. The payment will be made to pensioners with incomes below £35,00, as per their Income Tax returns. The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option." Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Yep. That is the next row right there: which pensioners get asked to do self-assessment.
As I say, my income from assorted pensions is around £35,000.However my wife also has a work as well as an OAP. Will she get it and I don't?
Just a point
It was per pensioner household so over 80's receive £150 each so only £150 subject to each pensioners tax
Unless Reeves has extended it to all pensioners but I doubt it
So my wife and I will each get it, but my income tax will be increased to recoup mine?
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I'd like to know why the Democrats decided to become soft on illegal immigration in the first place when most of their traditional voters wouldn't have been in favour of such a policy.
A lot of the cases we hear about have been living and working in the US for 20 or more years.
That argument is rarely applied to murderers for example. “He committed the crime 20 years ago.. let's forget it "
Have you never watched an American legal drama and heard the term ‘statute of limitations’?
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I'd like to know why the Democrats decided to become soft on illegal immigration in the first place when most of their traditional voters wouldn't have been in favour of such a policy.
A lot of the cases we hear about have been living and working in the US for 20 or more years.
That argument is rarely applied to murderers for example. “He committed the crime 20 years ago.. let's forget it "
Have you never watched an American legal drama and heard the term ‘statute of limitations’?
UK civil law has loads of time limits for causes of action.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
That is absurd. So up to that point 2 million, or 5 million dead Palestinians is acceptable to you.
Don't be ridiculous, people die in wars.
How many deaths would cross a line to make it wrong for us to demand the unconditional surrender of the Nazis?
How many deaths would cross a line to make it wrong for us to demand the unconditional surrender of Imperial Japan?
How many deaths would cross a line to make it wrong for Israel to demand the unconditional surrender of Hamas?
Can you provide a figure for none, one, two or all three of those?
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
I'd like to know why the Democrats decided to become soft on illegal immigration in the first place when most of their traditional voters wouldn't have been in favour of such a policy.
The hilarious thing is Labour trying to argue it’s the improving economy that has allowed them to do it. No-one believes that justification, it is a political panic move.
I don't like the look of this situation in Los Angeles, at all.
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
Yes. Reichstag fire moment to come. This is a practice.
The hyperbole on this is off the scale. Conditions in 1933 in Germany were rather different to those in the USA 2025. For one thing the National Guard is not the SA or the SS. Secondly the USA is comprised on individual states in a way that Germany wasn't (someone will no doubt argue the toss on this, but Bavaria, say, was not as independent a state as Los Angeles is). And even in Germany new votes were held (albeit with some parties banned). Do you think that the Trump administration could really achieve a block on mid term elections? If you do, then you have clearly risen early, gone to the off licence, bought and consumed an awful lot of booze.
The answer to your question (italicised) is 'I don't know'. To the question 'Is it possible that they would if they could' I believe the answer is Yes.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
The Israeli government's job is to protect the Israeli citizens lives first, and do what it can to minimise innocent Palestinian deaths without compromising the legitimate military objective of defeating Hamas.
If Palestinians die, it is due primarily to Hamas refusing to surrender and other nations refusing refuge to innocents caught in the middle. It is not Israel's primary responsibility to prevent Palestinian deaths. It's primary responsibility is to achieve the military objective first and foremost.
Ps I've said I'd like to see as many innocent Palestinians get refuge from Gaza in Egypt to avoid the war zone, as happens in other conflicts globally. Sadly they're kettled in, something I oppose. Those who support kettling of innocents are showing callous disregard for their lives, not me.
I see that Hamas chief Sinwar's body has been found, in a tunnel underneath a hospital. With journalists being taken to the tunnels underneath the hospital.
I seem to recall @bondegezou insisting a few days ago that Hamas were actually using a school, not the hospital, a few metres away as the human shields, so that makes it OK by Hamas and a war crime by Israel to strike at him at the hospital where his body has now been found.
Good on Israel for striking another Hamas leader. A shame for the poor, innocent Palestinians who are caught in the middle and being denied refuge from this war by neighbouring states until Hamas surrenders.
The tunnels situation is quite interesting. In such a densely-packed area as Gaza, it's quite possible that a tunnel network starting from (say) a shop, spreads not just downwards, but laterally, to cover an area that encompasses the footprints of both a school and a hospital. They may (or may not) be connected to those buildings (*), but even if they are not connected, they are using those civilian structures as cover.
The idea that "it starts from a school, not the hospital" seems rather simplistic.
But on the other hand: if the network is widespread, how could the journalists know whether they are under the hospital or elsewhere (given the tunnel was apparently accessed through freshly-dug earth just outside the hospital)?
(*) It would make sense for them to be connected, even if not the primary route used.
It is astonishing that some (not you) still try to pretend that hospitals and schools are not used by Hamas for their command and control centres making them both legal targets for the Israelis and putting their own vulnerable people at risk. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
Does this excuse what Israel is doing? Of course not. Much of what they are doing are war crimes. But bombing hospitals used in this way is not. It’s merely abhorrent.
Abhorrent but sadly necessary to defeat Hamas.
Too many here don't want to see Hamas defeated, or their unconditional surrender though.
The Tamil Tigers were defeated. There's no reason Hamas can't be. All it takes to end the fighting is for them to surrender.
I think it's bloody stupid and Netanyahu is the wrong person to be Israeli PM.
Israel should be seeking a monopoly of violence, as any state does.
Thank goodness Israel is a democracy and Israelis have had multiple opportunities (checks notes: since 1996) to get rid of Netanyahu, unlike the vile Gazans who bear all responsibilty for Hamas being in power since a single election in 2006.
If I had one wish it would be that someone would drop Bartholomew Roberts in the middle of Gaza with his laptop and see whether he develops into a human being
I want the war to end, with the surrender of Hamas.
That won't happen until the grievances that Hamas feeds off are addressed. Even if Hamas were somehow destroyed, some successor organisation would take its place.
Unlike, say, the Ukraine war, which is basically one man's folly, though he is backed by a band of opportunists and fanatics, the Palestinian cause seems genuinely popular and has survived God knows how many military defeats.
Until Israel offers genuine concessions and deals with the Palestinians as equals, entitled to at least some share in the land the Israelis occupied last century, the tragic, pointless sore will continue to fester.
Israel has repeatedly offered genuine concessions, this century. Such as the agreement spurned by Arafat, or the subsequent withdrawal from Gaza which Hamas then stepped into the void with. Both were before Netanyahu returned to power.
I would love nothing more than to see Hamas defeated, then some Palestinian leadership stepping into the void that settles and ends the fighting. I'm confident most Israelis would vote for that too, if it were an option.
Its not an option until Hamas is eradicated though.
The way Israel is carrying on is more likely to radicalise not only Palestinian opinion but Arab and muslim opinion more widely (as indeed we see in this country).
But I don't accept the premise that a Hamas regime was inevitable; it wasn't in the West Bank (which admittedly wasn't kept under such tight restrictions - though the restrictions followed the Hamas coup rather than vice versa). That the Palestinian leadership have previously rejected genuine offers is their own stupid fault; that doesn't give Israel a green light to make even worse decisions.
Hamas does need removing from Gaza; that's not going to happen militarily unless you remove the population - which seems to be the conclusion Israel has come to: and a a war crime and a crime against humanity. It's also a bloody stupid precedent given that extreme Arab opinion holds much the same view of the presence of the state of Israel.
If peace isn't possible without the population being moved then the population should be moved, which happens regularly in conflicts most recently in Azerbaijan without so much as a murmur from most of the world.
Though hopefully it won't come to that and Hamas can surrender instead, as the Tamil Tigers did.
Do you not see that Bibi is 50% of the problem? Bibi requires this to continue to keep out of an Israeli jail.
How many dead Gazans is acceptable? If the number of dead Palestinians reaches a 7 figure number, does that cross a line?
No dead Palestinians are acceptable after Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
Only a rank antisemite would show the level of disregard for Israeli lives that you show for Palestinians.
One of the main differences between the two sets of leaders is that the Israeli government does what it can to protect its people. Hamas do the very opposite with their people.
Bibi didn't seem to be particularly interested in the live hostages, and was quite comfortable for them to become collateral damage in his grand plan.
Yep, as ever, it's Israel who are to blame for Hamas invading Israel and taking hostages.
Where am I defending Hamas?
You seem to have the Jeremy Corbyn view that Israel and Netanyahu should be conflated as one and the same.
Remarkably two readers gave you "likes" for your nonsensical post.
The hilarious thing is Labour trying to argue it’s the improving economy that has allowed them to do it. No-one believes that justification, it is a political panic move.
Sam Coates of Sky saying it is utterly incoherence, not least because the economy is not improving and she is giving in across the board under pressure from her back benches
Comments
*Mostly joking but there is a bit of truth in there. I reckon most people would struggle to name more than two or three womens tennis players and as for identifying them...
The first is the most obvious. If we go for a regional pricing structure, whilst it's good news for those in areas with lots of windmills and few people, and bad news for people elsewhere, unless this results in a significant movement of demand, the lack of wires from Scotland to the SE will remain exactly the same.
I'm not sure there is going to be much movement in demand - people are not going to be upping sticks and moving to Scotland from Essex to save £500 a year off their electric bill. Things like data centers also tend to hang out where customers are for obvious reasons. Heavy industry is expensive to move for any number of reasons, not least planning. Try getting planning permission for a new steelworks somewhere, and see how you get on!
The second (and much larger) problem is that if we were to magically decouple electric prices from gas prices, and so prices are set by the marginal cost of renewables, who would build another windfarm? Wind may be free, but collecting energy from it requires loads of really expensive infrastructure, very little of it maintenance free.
Gas is free too, it just requires very expensive infrastructure to get it out of the ground.
Everyone in business requires a return on investment, otherwise that investment will not be made.
That said, one of the biggest mistakes in the whole energy market was curtailment payments - the deal should be that if we don't want power from your windfarm, the grid doesn't take it - period. If you really want or need to dump your excess power into the grid (e.g. some thermal plant, where cycling for short periods isn't viable), pricing should just go negative. Curtailment payments provide perverse incentives to build windfarms in places without adequate grid infrastructure.
Possible the best fix would be abolishing curtailment payments, but letting private companies build additional grid connectors (which they would charge the system to use). That would incentivise the owners of wind farms to build their own grid links, rather than the current model of privatising the profits (which accrue to the windfarm owners) and socialising the costs (as national grid charges all of us for putting in the additional grid infrastructure).
If we are serious about all this, we also need to nuke the planning system so pretty much anyone can put up pylons anywhere. People won't like it, but this isn't a having cake and eating it option - if we want to completely rebase power generation in the country we can't do it without putting in the necessary infrastructure.
Part of the reason why there is so much angst about Gaza is due to the substantial lack of help for the Gaza residents (and also the limited criticism of Israel and substantial lack of more than words on that, plus the role of the West in supplying arms to Israel).
(I'm not - obviously, I hope! - suggesting arming Hamas or anyone else in Gaza).
People will not vote for a negative account of who we are, where we came from and where we are going.
Indirectly? Absolutely. He was the one who openly stated that Israel should support Hamas against the more moderate Palestinian authority as a means of undermining any prospect of a Two State solution. He was the one who encouraged foreign governments to direct funding towards Hamas rather than the Authority. He did this in the clear knowledge of who and what they were since it suited his political aims.
He absolutely carries some of the blame personally for Hamas being able to launch the October 7th attacks.
Plan A is presumably to win in 2028 and then retire to a mild smattering of applause in about 2030. If he's feeling petty, do a bit longer than Dave.
Plan B is then to walk/be pushed in 2028 and let someone else try and save the furniture in 2029.
In any case I’d imagine someone who conspired to support Hamas and was in ultimate command of Israel’s security on October 7th would have a few questions to answer. Lots of Israelis seem to agree.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/lapid-says-netanyahu-knew-for-months-before-oct-7-that-a-violent-eruption-was-looming/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-netanyahu-looking-to-ban-formation-of-state-committee-of-inquiry-into-oct-7/
Yes, the Russians are doing and have done dreadful things in Ukraine. I have been consistent on the need for Russia to be defeated in that war in no small part because of those actions (which would be applied elsewhere in Russia's next war if they get away with it in Ukraine), and once Russia is kicked out, the need for a deRussification of the recovered country.
Leadbeter let her true feelings on assisted out over the weekend - clearly wants far far more than the current bill before parliament (which would not have allowed the suicide of the couple she references)
Tamil is still an Official Language of Sri Lanka.
Yes - the Tory party needs assisted dying.
Labour's problem now (and the Tories even more so) is that having not set the terms of the debate they are now hamstrung by Reform setting it. Also, with only the Lib Dems rejecting it and arguing an alternative baseline, both red and blue risk losing support to Gold as well as Turquoise.
As to your question is "Netanyahu is to blame for 7 October"? Some have suggested that by promoting and cultivating Hamas as a means of suppressing Gazans for two decades mean his hands are not clean over October 7th.
CfD contracts would mean energy isn't massively cheaper than now because we guarantee a price to renewable generators to stimulate investment - but that does mean we are much less vulnerable to energy shocks like Ukraine, because that element of our consumption is protected.
Linking the value of those contracts to regional pricing would mean more investment closer to population centres, reducing transmission costs. At a domestic level, it would also mean the proliferation of solar across the Highlands would slow, and increase in the central belt. That seems like a good outcome too..
It looks very much like an accelerated, partly staged symbolic spectacle, to possibly make other politics easier. You almost feel that some Trumpists have read Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle". In his case though, the spectacles were intended as precursors to structural political changes, and then leftwing Revolution. The Trunpists may be trying the same with rightwing spectacle
narrated by Samuel West
Episode 1:
2010 - Helped Into Power
“A Westminster council tenancy saves you £25,000 in rent each year.
Westminster is effectively handing out gifts worth hundreds of thousands of pounds to current council tenants (two-thirds born overseas).”
https://x.com/sashworthhayes/status/1931769554050376005?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
This is why Labour WON’T win in 2028. The anger about this kind of stuff is off the dial
Who is suggesting Israel should surrender to Hamas? I am not. I am simply refuting your argument that suggests Netanyahu gives two shiny ones about retrieving live hostages. Just ask the hostage families.
This is was Debord was onto, and what some Trumpists seem to understand, much better than the modern American Democrats, or progressives.
I didn't know the coal seam maps were online now - we'd only seen the paper maps in passing in the local authority planning department (or on the wall in the actual colliery!)
As an example of the random stuff it explains we recently surveyed a field in an area of surface mined coal. One corner of the field had a reasonably rare indicator (Adder's Tongue) of old grasslands growing in the amenity grass and it was a bit of a head scratcher.
It turns out that particular corner of the field was not surface mined whereas the rest was. We had assumed that it was all restored.
These maps should have been online years ago but it is good to see them now.
PS It also shows a recent deep mine panel under the part of Fishlake that flooded. You can see the subsidence on the EA Lidar but it is subtle and not clearly delineated but this makes it quite clear.
Let's hope Britain's favourite chef can find a solution that does not involve bankrupting LEAs with minicab bills. It is a serious issue affecting 10 to 15 per cent in each class, apparently.
But here it is in hard numbers. The sense that native Brits are being taxed to death to benefit foreigners is going to KILL Labour. And if you “worry about” the influx of migrants? - that means you’re radicalised, according to Prevent
A storm is brewin’. David Betz might be right
Reeves extends WFP to 9 million pensioners and only those earning over £35,000 will not be eligible
What an idiotic decision
https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-labour-reform-starmer-farage-defence-tories-migration-12593360
There’s no working with the President. There’s only working for him. I will never work for Trump
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1931920349039579584
Utterly useless!
Note to Daily Telegraph. What about free school meals provision, or lack thereof? You have an angle!
What a fiasco this has all been and totally and utterly her own mess.
The Guardians report says that "Ministers are restoring the automatic payments as a universal benefit this winter and then recouping the money when higher-income pensioners fill in their tax returns, as creating a new means test would be a highly complex option."
Not quite sure how that will work out. My income's about that and HMRC say I don't have to fill fill a tax return as pretty well all my income's from pensions. I've some small investments but the incomes are are around £100 pa.
Just
Useless.
I am taking 5 overseas holidays this year, yet I will be getting help with my heating. Madness.
And £35k (or presumably £70k per couple) is an awful lot of money. It is difficult to believe people on this income need help with heating even without substantial savings.
PS Haven't checked the details so reacting to the comments posted on PB.
It was per pensioner household so over 80's receive £150 each so only £150 subject to each pensioners tax
Unless Reeves has extended it to all pensioners but I doubt it
Former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert says his country is committing war crimes
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/27/former-israeli-pm-ehud-olmert-says-his-country-is-committing-war-crimes
So how are they going to sort that mess out?
It's bad policy, yes. But there is a limit to how much good policy is compatible with electoral success. And pensioners have blooming good PR. Unfortunately, poor children in large families don't.
With Keir Starmer saying the Government needs to provide clarity soon on winter fuel allowance eligibility. Where do the public think the cut off for eligibility should be? A majority think the cut off should be pensioners on incomes higher than £50,000 (or no cut off at all).
https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3lqp5mlzr322d
Two thirds of the public think the decision to increase eligibility is the right one - and under a quarter think it was the wrong decision.
https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3lqp5mmzshk2d
Reeves having a car crash interview with Sky's just now
You could get 1,200 miles of segregated cycle lane for that #fuming
Open the steelworks and coal mines
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1931735288042103198
Highly unlikely I would have though. The Farming lobby is far less effective than the wealthy old lobby.
How many deaths would cross a line to make it wrong for us to demand the unconditional surrender of the Nazis?
How many deaths would cross a line to make it wrong for us to demand the unconditional surrender of Imperial Japan?
How many deaths would cross a line to make it wrong for Israel to demand the unconditional surrender of Hamas?
Can you provide a figure for none, one, two or all three of those?
If Palestinians die, it is due primarily to Hamas refusing to surrender and other nations refusing refuge to innocents caught in the middle. It is not Israel's primary responsibility to prevent Palestinian deaths. It's primary responsibility is to achieve the military objective first and foremost.
Ps I've said I'd like to see as many innocent Palestinians get refuge from Gaza in Egypt to avoid the war zone, as happens in other conflicts globally. Sadly they're kettled in, something I oppose. Those who support kettling of innocents are showing callous disregard for their lives, not me.
You seem to have the Jeremy Corbyn view that Israel and Netanyahu should be conflated as one and the same.
Remarkably two readers gave you "likes" for your nonsensical post.
He added she was very nervous