Tucker Carlson believes demons created nuclear technology "I’ve never met a person who can isolate the moment where nuclear technology became known to man" & that Christians are being punished for dropping the bomb. https://x.com/TheMilkBarTV/status/1936625005854659005
"I’ve never met a person who can isolate the moment where nuclear technology became known to man"
Errr
Would be because he hasn't read any history?
Or seen the film Barbie (or was it the other one)?
What has happened to Tucker Carlson? Is he now more MAGA than Trump or has he gone the full David Icke?
Hard to imagine he used to be on CNN, even Fox News. I can't work out if he has gone mad and really believes this or thinks this is the stuff hus audience wants to hear.
I suspect his ego has got so huge that he's unable to differentiate between an odd notion that pops into his head from an insight of cosmic importance.
Looking at the satellite images, why wouldn't you blow up the support building that is on the surface while you were at it.
Good evening
I am no expert but I understand these bombs penetrate to quite a depth before exploding hence I am not surprised the surface buildings remain untouched, not least because B2 only have a couple of them at a time
Yes I understand that, but the attacks weren't just the B2 bombers, they went with an array of fire from fighter jets to submarines.
I imagine they just wanted to drop their payload from 50,000 odd feet and return to base and no doubt intelligence decided the surface buildings were not worth risking other aircraft with a different target
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Looking at the satellite images, why wouldn't you blow up the support building that is on the surface while you were at it.
Good evening
I am no expert but I understand these bombs penetrate to quite a depth before exploding hence I am not surprised the surface buildings remain untouched, not least because B2 only have a couple of them at a time
Yes I understand that, but the attacks weren't just the B2 bombers, they went with an array of fire from fighter jets to submarines.
I imagine they just wanted to drop their payload from 50,000 odd feet and return to base and no doubt intelligence decided the surface buildings were not worth risking other aircraft with a different target
Or the surface buildings just contain low-value equipment, or are there as decoys ("That's why we had all that construction equipment there for six years! We were building this building!")
I thoroughly expect US and Israeli intelligence on the facility to be accurate, and that the precision attack was also accurate.
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
If Trump wants his historical legacy, evaporating ten million Tehranians would presumably measure up.
I wouldn't want that to be my legacy, but a forever place in history is a forever place in history.
Hitler has a place in history, as does Bin Laden, Harold Shipman, Timothy McVeigh, Thomas Hamilton, Genghis Khan, Rose West, Stalin, Ted Bundy and Ian Brady and Jimmy Savile and now Putin.
Having a place in history is not always because you are remembered positively
Tucker Carlson believes demons created nuclear technology "I’ve never met a person who can isolate the moment where nuclear technology became known to man" & that Christians are being punished for dropping the bomb. https://x.com/TheMilkBarTV/status/1936625005854659005
"I’ve never met a person who can isolate the moment where nuclear technology became known to man"
Errr
Would be because he hasn't read any history?
Or seen the film Barbie (or was it the other one)?
What has happened to Tucker Carlson? Is he now more MAGA than Trump or has he gone the full David Icke?
Hard to imagine he used to be on CNN, even Fox News. I can't work out if he has gone mad and really believes this or thinks this is the stuff hus audience wants to hear.
I suspect his ego has got so huge that he's unable to differentiate between an odd notion that pops into his head from an insight of cosmic importance.
Looking at the satellite images, why wouldn't you blow up the support building that is on the surface while you were at it.
Good evening
I am no expert but I understand these bombs penetrate to quite a depth before exploding hence I am not surprised the surface buildings remain untouched, not least because B2 only have a couple of them at a time
If I understand correctly, they don't leave much marks when going in, but the underground explosion creates a void which induces a partial collapse on the surface. Not as big as a crater, but there.
Tucker Carlson believes demons created nuclear technology "I’ve never met a person who can isolate the moment where nuclear technology became known to man" & that Christians are being punished for dropping the bomb. https://x.com/TheMilkBarTV/status/1936625005854659005
"I’ve never met a person who can isolate the moment where nuclear technology became known to man"
Errr
Would be because he hasn't read any history?
Or seen the film Barbie (or was it the other one)?
What has happened to Tucker Carlson? Is he now more MAGA than Trump or has he gone the full David Icke?
Hard to imagine he used to be on CNN, even Fox News. I can't work out if he has gone mad and really believes this or thinks this is the stuff hus audience wants to hear.
I suspect his ego has got so huge that he's unable to differentiate between an odd notion that pops into his head from an insight of cosmic importance.
Looking at the satellite images, why wouldn't you blow up the support building that is on the surface while you were at it.
Good evening
I am no expert but I understand these bombs penetrate to quite a depth before exploding hence I am not surprised the surface buildings remain untouched, not least because B2 only have a couple of them at a time
Yes I understand that, but the attacks weren't just the B2 bombers, they went with an array of fire from fighter jets to submarines.
I imagine they just wanted to drop their payload from 50,000 odd feet and return to base and no doubt intelligence decided the surface buildings were not worth risking other aircraft with a different target
Or the surface buildings just contain low-value equipment, or are there as decoys ("That's why we had all that construction equipment there for six years! We were building this building!")
I thoroughly expect US and Israeli intelligence on the facility to be accurate, and that the precision attack was also accurate.
As I understand it, the actual contents of the buildings were moved underground long ago.
So destroying them would just aggravate some large spiders. Having met some large, Middle Eastern spiders, this is not something you do lightly.
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
As ever, that depends on what you think Iran wants. If Iran really wants to develop a nuclear capability, than you either threaten or bribe them to stop their work. This is what the west has been doing for a while, but only works if Tehran does not really want nukes, and operate in good faith.
So a question is whether Iran have only used their refinement processes as a way of getting something off their enemies, or if they really want nukes. I reckon the latter, as the sanctions cost them more than they get in the way of concessions for stopping work.
If Trump wants his historical legacy, evaporating ten million Tehranians would presumably measure up.
I wouldn't want that to be my legacy, but a forever place in history is a forever place in history.
Hitler has a place in history, as does Bin Laden, Harold Shipman, Timothy McVeigh, Thomas Hamilton, Genghis Khan, Rose West, Stalin, Ted Bundy and Ian Brady and Jimmy Savile and now Putin.
Having a place in history is not always because you are remembered positively
Hitler and Stalin are the only ones who will be remembered through the mists of time like Genghis Khan or Ivan the Terrible. With the right intervention both Trump and Putin could make the list and become as notorious.
Vance: I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents
I thought Vance was meant to be intelligent. Is that really the best he can do?
Tricky for Vance. He could be seeing his presidential hopes evaporate before his eyes. He probably needs to stir up a bit of war jingoism and then do (another) shape shift into diehard NeoCon.
I doubt it, Vance presenting himself as the true heir to MAGA against Don Trump Jr and a neocon Rubio and Haley in the 2028 GOP primaries sees him likely favourite for the nomination.
He is also as VP just a Trump heart attack or impeachment and conviction away from the Presidency. If I was Vance I would be having regular lunches with POTUS with burgers and fries, laying on the salt thickly
If Trump wants his historical legacy, evaporating ten million Tehranians would presumably measure up.
I wouldn't want that to be my legacy, but a forever place in history is a forever place in history.
Hitler has a place in history, as does Bin Laden, Harold Shipman, Timothy McVeigh, Thomas Hamilton, Genghis Khan, Rose West, Stalin, Ted Bundy and Ian Brady and Jimmy Savile and now Putin.
Having a place in history is not always because you are remembered positively
Hitler and Stalin are the only ones who will be remembered through the mists of time like Genghis Khan or Ivan the Terrible. With the right intervention both Trump and Putin could make the list and become as notorious.
There are many historical records of all of them, I doubt even Trump and Putin are as big egomaniacs they want to be remembered in the same breath as Hitler, though Putin might be OK being seen as heir to Stalin
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
The alternative was the nuclear deal under Obama, that was working well and Trump only cancelled because it was done by Obama.
Looking at the satellite images, why wouldn't you blow up the support building that is on the surface while you were at it.
Good evening
I am no expert but I understand these bombs penetrate to quite a depth before exploding hence I am not surprised the surface buildings remain untouched, not least because B2 only have a couple of them at a time
Yes I understand that, but the attacks weren't just the B2 bombers, they went with an array of fire from fighter jets to submarines.
I imagine they just wanted to drop their payload from 50,000 odd feet and return to base and no doubt intelligence decided the surface buildings were not worth risking other aircraft with a different target
Or the surface buildings just contain low-value equipment, or are there as decoys ("That's why we had all that construction equipment there for six years! We were building this building!")
I thoroughly expect US and Israeli intelligence on the facility to be accurate, and that the precision attack was also accurate.
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
The alternative was the nuclear deal under Obama, that was working well and Trump only cancelled because it was done by Obama.
Was Iran weaker or stronger after eight years of Obama? Was Russia weaker or stronger?
If Trump wants his historical legacy, evaporating ten million Tehranians would presumably measure up.
I wouldn't want that to be my legacy, but a forever place in history is a forever place in history.
Hitler has a place in history, as does Bin Laden, Harold Shipman, Timothy McVeigh, Thomas Hamilton, Genghis Khan, Rose West, Stalin, Ted Bundy and Ian Brady and Jimmy Savile and now Putin.
Having a place in history is not always because you are remembered positively
Hitler and Stalin are the only ones who will be remembered through the mists of time like Genghis Khan or Ivan the Terrible. With the right intervention both Trump and Putin could make the list and become as notorious.
“What little information we have about the old times, the pittance of data the Butlerians left us, Korba has brought it for you. Start with the Genghis Khan.” “Genghis . . . Khan? Was he of the Sardauker, m’Lord?” “Oh, long before that. He killed . . . perhaps four million.” “He must’ve had formidable weaponry to kill that many, Sire. Lasbeams, perhaps, or . . .” “He didn’t kill them himself, Sil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions. There’s another emperor I want you to note in passing — a Hitler. He killed more than six million. Pretty good for those days.” “Killed . . . by his legions?” Stilgar asked. “Yes.” “Not very impressive statistics, m’Lord.”
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
The alternative was the nuclear deal under Obama, that was working well and Trump only cancelled because it was done by Obama.
That does not addres the issue of today and the US has had Biden in office since
Looking at the satellite images, why wouldn't you blow up the support building that is on the surface while you were at it.
Good evening
I am no expert but I understand these bombs penetrate to quite a depth before exploding hence I am not surprised the surface buildings remain untouched, not least because B2 only have a couple of them at a time
If I understand correctly, they don't leave much marks when going in, but the underground explosion creates a void which induces a partial collapse on the surface. Not as big as a crater, but there.
Yes, that's correct. And the collapse can actually be more damaging then the bomb explosion itself.
The Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs used by the RAF during WWII were often used in this way. The Germans built structures with immensely thick concrete roofs, up to 30m thick, to resist penetration bombs. So the RAF responded by aiming their bombs to just miss the target, so the resulting ground collapse would then undermine the structure and cause it to break apart.
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
The alternative was the nuclear deal under Obama, that was working well and Trump only cancelled because it was done by Obama.
Was Iran weaker or stronger after eight years of Obama? Was Russia weaker or stronger?
After Covid , and Ukraine the world was hoping for less drama . Instead we got Trump again , Netenyahus genocide and now a possibility that things unravel further after the US got involved with Iran.
If the Straits of Hormuz are shut then oil prices will spike causing a further hit to growth and spiking inflation .
Trump seems to be actively working against the UK and yet the country is expected to roll out the red carpet for another state visit !
Iranian parliament has already approved closing it, its with the supreme national council to action. Al Jazzy reporting it will now happen. Oil should be over 100 dollars a barrel by morning
Premarkets open in a few hours. We will see the impact of this news then.
It will be what it will be. In the long term it will all be fine or we will all be dead in a nuclear war.
On the plus side Bibi avoids jail time. So a price worth paying.
We won't all be dead in a nuclear war. A lot of us, yes, but by no means all
Well after the nuclear war I doubt I’ll be here to waste what little time remains arguing the toss with tedious pedants.
Then, finally, I shall be peebee king. Glory to Woolie
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
The alternative was the nuclear deal under Obama, that was working well and Trump only cancelled because it was done by Obama.
Was Iran weaker or stronger after eight years of Obama? Was Russia weaker or stronger?
After Covid , and Ukraine the world was hoping for less drama . Instead we got Trump again , Netenyahus genocide and now a possibility that things unravel further after the US got involved with Iran.
If the Straits of Hormuz are shut then oil prices will spike causing a further hit to growth and spiking inflation .
Trump seems to be actively working against the UK and yet the country is expected to roll out the red carpet for another state visit !
Iranian parliament has already approved closing it, its with the supreme national council to action. Al Jazzy reporting it will now happen. Oil should be over 100 dollars a barrel by morning
Premarkets open in a few hours. We will see the impact of this news then.
It will be what it will be. In the long term it will all be fine or we will all be dead in a nuclear war.
On the plus side Bibi avoids jail time. So a price worth paying.
We won't all be dead in a nuclear war. A lot of us, yes, but by no means all
Well after the nuclear war I doubt I’ll be here to waste what little time remains arguing the toss with tedious pedants.
Then, finally, I shall be peebee king. Glory to Woolie
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Not terribly surprised by the morning's news. One can argue it's a good argument for non-proliferation but I don't recall American planes bombing Indian, Pakistani and North Korean let alone Israeli nuclear production facilities.
I suppose it comes down to the truth you have to be a particular class of lunatic to be afforded the privilege of being denied nuclear weapons by force.
I'm musing more on the domestic political impact. While the pro-Palestine groups continue to agitate in parts of the country (my part of London as an example), I've not yet seen a big upswing in activity directly resulting from the conflict between Israel and Iran - that might change with the overt US intervention.
It will continue to perpetuate the other current schism in UK politics - not the one on the so-called "Right" but the one on the so-called "Left" between Labour and a coalition of young Muslim voters and former pro-Corbyn supporters. The latter are more interesting at a local level as they have been campaigning strongly and effectively on the failings of London Labour Councils and may well capture a number of seats at the next London locals next year.
You make a very important point that the right will support Trump's actions, but the left will be in turmoil
Even before last night we had the left on manoeuvres to coalesce around Corbyn over the proposal to prescribe the PLA, a real rebellion over the benefit reductions, and now this
Where this goes for Starmer is highly unpredictable
I would never regard myself as on either the "right" or the "left" to be honest but I see more advantages for the region and the world in a non-nuclear Iran than a nuclear Iran.
That being said, regime change isn't a policy option for me - the Iranians themselves are the only ones who should decide what kind of Government under which they wish to live whether it ber theocracy, democracy or monarchy or some combination of all three.
Iran also has the right to defend itself and we should respect its territorial integrity and independence just as it must respect everyone else's.
How this plays out longer term I don't know - it will harden the resolve of those on the "left" who are opposed to the current incarnation of Labour and will see it as mark 2 Blairism but that politics electorally was pretty successful domestically.
I generally agree with your point. However, the Iranian people *cannot* decide what kind of government they live under: they do not get to vote for the supreme leader, or members of the ruling council. And they never will get that choice until there is a regime change.
Yes but the question is does a changed regime have legitimacy if the change is imposed by an external power or does it have legitimacy if it is facilitated by an external power?
There's a crucial difference - the Iranian people changing their own regime is one thing - I'd welcome it, most on here would and, if following some transitional period, they chose their next Government via a free and fair election, I'm sure, whatever that Government looked like, we would support it as a legitimate Government even if we didn't necessarily agree with all its policies.
If, however, the regime was seen to have been toppled from outside, any new Government would be tainted by that action and would lack popular legitimacy and, I suspect, would likely lose any election held because people like to be seen to be making their own decisions and running their own affairs as we apparently showed nine years ago.
Just as an aside, the theorcratic revolution in 1979 was widely supported within Iran as people at that time wanted an end to the rule of the Shah and the infamous SAVAK secret police.
Germany had a regime change imposed upon it externally in 1945 by the UK and USA and I think it was a change for the better.
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
The alternative was the nuclear deal under Obama, that was working well and Trump only cancelled because it was done by Obama.
Was Iran weaker or stronger after eight years of Obama? Was Russia weaker or stronger?
Russia is stronger after eight weeks of Trump!
How are you measuring its strength?
Russia is stuck in a war with Ukraine. Trump has pulled support for Ukraine. That puts Russia in a stronger position.
You know this, William. Don't play dumb. We know you're not. It's just getting embarrassing.
Not terribly surprised by the morning's news. One can argue it's a good argument for non-proliferation but I don't recall American planes bombing Indian, Pakistani and North Korean let alone Israeli nuclear production facilities.
I suppose it comes down to the truth you have to be a particular class of lunatic to be afforded the privilege of being denied nuclear weapons by force.
I'm musing more on the domestic political impact. While the pro-Palestine groups continue to agitate in parts of the country (my part of London as an example), I've not yet seen a big upswing in activity directly resulting from the conflict between Israel and Iran - that might change with the overt US intervention.
It will continue to perpetuate the other current schism in UK politics - not the one on the so-called "Right" but the one on the so-called "Left" between Labour and a coalition of young Muslim voters and former pro-Corbyn supporters. The latter are more interesting at a local level as they have been campaigning strongly and effectively on the failings of London Labour Councils and may well capture a number of seats at the next London locals next year.
You make a very important point that the right will support Trump's actions, but the left will be in turmoil
Even before last night we had the left on manoeuvres to coalesce around Corbyn over the proposal to prescribe the PLA, a real rebellion over the benefit reductions, and now this
Where this goes for Starmer is highly unpredictable
I would never regard myself as on either the "right" or the "left" to be honest but I see more advantages for the region and the world in a non-nuclear Iran than a nuclear Iran.
That being said, regime change isn't a policy option for me - the Iranians themselves are the only ones who should decide what kind of Government under which they wish to live whether it ber theocracy, democracy or monarchy or some combination of all three.
Iran also has the right to defend itself and we should respect its territorial integrity and independence just as it must respect everyone else's.
How this plays out longer term I don't know - it will harden the resolve of those on the "left" who are opposed to the current incarnation of Labour and will see it as mark 2 Blairism but that politics electorally was pretty successful domestically.
I generally agree with your point. However, the Iranian people *cannot* decide what kind of government they live under: they do not get to vote for the supreme leader, or members of the ruling council. And they never will get that choice until there is a regime change.
Yes but the question is does a changed regime have legitimacy if the change is imposed by an external power or does it have legitimacy if it is facilitated by an external power?
There's a crucial difference - the Iranian people changing their own regime is one thing - I'd welcome it, most on here would and, if following some transitional period, they chose their next Government via a free and fair election, I'm sure, whatever that Government looked like, we would support it as a legitimate Government even if we didn't necessarily agree with all its policies.
If, however, the regime was seen to have been toppled from outside, any new Government would be tainted by that action and would lack popular legitimacy and, I suspect, would likely lose any election held because people like to be seen to be making their own decisions and running their own affairs as we apparently showed nine years ago.
Just as an aside, the theorcratic revolution in 1979 was widely supported within Iran as people at that time wanted an end to the rule of the Shah and the infamous SAVAK secret police.
Germany had a regime change imposed upon it externally in 1945 by the UK and USA and I think it was a change for the better.
One half of Germany, fair enough. The other half... probably, on balance, but it's not quite so obvious.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
So, Murica are once again the big man on campus. Trump is master of all he surveys. The World is trembling at his feet. His wish is their command. Nobody dare defy his...
Not terribly surprised by the morning's news. One can argue it's a good argument for non-proliferation but I don't recall American planes bombing Indian, Pakistani and North Korean let alone Israeli nuclear production facilities.
I suppose it comes down to the truth you have to be a particular class of lunatic to be afforded the privilege of being denied nuclear weapons by force.
I'm musing more on the domestic political impact. While the pro-Palestine groups continue to agitate in parts of the country (my part of London as an example), I've not yet seen a big upswing in activity directly resulting from the conflict between Israel and Iran - that might change with the overt US intervention.
It will continue to perpetuate the other current schism in UK politics - not the one on the so-called "Right" but the one on the so-called "Left" between Labour and a coalition of young Muslim voters and former pro-Corbyn supporters. The latter are more interesting at a local level as they have been campaigning strongly and effectively on the failings of London Labour Councils and may well capture a number of seats at the next London locals next year.
You make a very important point that the right will support Trump's actions, but the left will be in turmoil
Even before last night we had the left on manoeuvres to coalesce around Corbyn over the proposal to prescribe the PLA, a real rebellion over the benefit reductions, and now this
Where this goes for Starmer is highly unpredictable
I would never regard myself as on either the "right" or the "left" to be honest but I see more advantages for the region and the world in a non-nuclear Iran than a nuclear Iran.
That being said, regime change isn't a policy option for me - the Iranians themselves are the only ones who should decide what kind of Government under which they wish to live whether it ber theocracy, democracy or monarchy or some combination of all three.
Iran also has the right to defend itself and we should respect its territorial integrity and independence just as it must respect everyone else's.
How this plays out longer term I don't know - it will harden the resolve of those on the "left" who are opposed to the current incarnation of Labour and will see it as mark 2 Blairism but that politics electorally was pretty successful domestically.
I generally agree with your point. However, the Iranian people *cannot* decide what kind of government they live under: they do not get to vote for the supreme leader, or members of the ruling council. And they never will get that choice until there is a regime change.
Yes but the question is does a changed regime have legitimacy if the change is imposed by an external power or does it have legitimacy if it is facilitated by an external power?
There's a crucial difference - the Iranian people changing their own regime is one thing - I'd welcome it, most on here would and, if following some transitional period, they chose their next Government via a free and fair election, I'm sure, whatever that Government looked like, we would support it as a legitimate Government even if we didn't necessarily agree with all its policies.
If, however, the regime was seen to have been toppled from outside, any new Government would be tainted by that action and would lack popular legitimacy and, I suspect, would likely lose any election held because people like to be seen to be making their own decisions and running their own affairs as we apparently showed nine years ago.
Just as an aside, the theorcratic revolution in 1979 was widely supported within Iran as people at that time wanted an end to the rule of the Shah and the infamous SAVAK secret police.
Germany had a regime change imposed upon it externally in 1945 by the UK and USA and I think it was a change for the better.
Well half of it and that was set on it's way by complete defeat and a full scale occupation. Neither Israel nor the US is going to do that so whatever regime that came after the Ayatollahs would have to stand on it's own two feet.
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
That is indeed a cracking film. There are quite a few other Poliakoff films I've come across which really, really should get airtime on BBC4 or at the very least the iPlayer. But for BBC reasons obviously they don't.
"Stronger Than The Sun" was one I especially enjoyed.
Not terribly surprised by the morning's news. One can argue it's a good argument for non-proliferation but I don't recall American planes bombing Indian, Pakistani and North Korean let alone Israeli nuclear production facilities.
I suppose it comes down to the truth you have to be a particular class of lunatic to be afforded the privilege of being denied nuclear weapons by force.
I'm musing more on the domestic political impact. While the pro-Palestine groups continue to agitate in parts of the country (my part of London as an example), I've not yet seen a big upswing in activity directly resulting from the conflict between Israel and Iran - that might change with the overt US intervention.
It will continue to perpetuate the other current schism in UK politics - not the one on the so-called "Right" but the one on the so-called "Left" between Labour and a coalition of young Muslim voters and former pro-Corbyn supporters. The latter are more interesting at a local level as they have been campaigning strongly and effectively on the failings of London Labour Councils and may well capture a number of seats at the next London locals next year.
You make a very important point that the right will support Trump's actions, but the left will be in turmoil
Even before last night we had the left on manoeuvres to coalesce around Corbyn over the proposal to prescribe the PLA, a real rebellion over the benefit reductions, and now this
Where this goes for Starmer is highly unpredictable
I would never regard myself as on either the "right" or the "left" to be honest but I see more advantages for the region and the world in a non-nuclear Iran than a nuclear Iran.
That being said, regime change isn't a policy option for me - the Iranians themselves are the only ones who should decide what kind of Government under which they wish to live whether it ber theocracy, democracy or monarchy or some combination of all three.
Iran also has the right to defend itself and we should respect its territorial integrity and independence just as it must respect everyone else's.
How this plays out longer term I don't know - it will harden the resolve of those on the "left" who are opposed to the current incarnation of Labour and will see it as mark 2 Blairism but that politics electorally was pretty successful domestically.
I generally agree with your point. However, the Iranian people *cannot* decide what kind of government they live under: they do not get to vote for the supreme leader, or members of the ruling council. And they never will get that choice until there is a regime change.
Yes but the question is does a changed regime have legitimacy if the change is imposed by an external power or does it have legitimacy if it is facilitated by an external power?
There's a crucial difference - the Iranian people changing their own regime is one thing - I'd welcome it, most on here would and, if following some transitional period, they chose their next Government via a free and fair election, I'm sure, whatever that Government looked like, we would support it as a legitimate Government even if we didn't necessarily agree with all its policies.
If, however, the regime was seen to have been toppled from outside, any new Government would be tainted by that action and would lack popular legitimacy and, I suspect, would likely lose any election held because people like to be seen to be making their own decisions and running their own affairs as we apparently showed nine years ago.
Just as an aside, the theorcratic revolution in 1979 was widely supported within Iran as people at that time wanted an end to the rule of the Shah and the infamous SAVAK secret police.
Germany had a regime change imposed upon it externally in 1945 by the UK and USA and I think it was a change for the better.
Wasn’t there another big U involved in the regime change?
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
As long as you do the HR course before you lose it - that's the truly important thing.
Forget about intelligence is the motto of this regime...
That response as crazy as it might sound. If he says yes, the next question will be what, when will it be released to the public, etc and confirmation that Mossad have agents at the highest level in the Iranian system. You don't want to even get into the yes, no, maybe, can't say.
Don't try to explain that to Scott.
I have been wondering about those who are critical of Trump on this whether they are relaxed that Iran may produce nuclear weapons, or if not how would they suggest the nuclear threat by Iran be neutered
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
I think these attacks have probably made it more likely Iran will develop nuclear weapons, to protect themselves from attack.
The alternative was to negotiate inspections in exchange for reducing sanctions etc. We tried that, hard to say if it was working tbh, certainly Iran didn't develop a nuclear weapon already...
Not terribly surprised by the morning's news. One can argue it's a good argument for non-proliferation but I don't recall American planes bombing Indian, Pakistani and North Korean let alone Israeli nuclear production facilities.
I suppose it comes down to the truth you have to be a particular class of lunatic to be afforded the privilege of being denied nuclear weapons by force.
I'm musing more on the domestic political impact. While the pro-Palestine groups continue to agitate in parts of the country (my part of London as an example), I've not yet seen a big upswing in activity directly resulting from the conflict between Israel and Iran - that might change with the overt US intervention.
It will continue to perpetuate the other current schism in UK politics - not the one on the so-called "Right" but the one on the so-called "Left" between Labour and a coalition of young Muslim voters and former pro-Corbyn supporters. The latter are more interesting at a local level as they have been campaigning strongly and effectively on the failings of London Labour Councils and may well capture a number of seats at the next London locals next year.
You make a very important point that the right will support Trump's actions, but the left will be in turmoil
Even before last night we had the left on manoeuvres to coalesce around Corbyn over the proposal to prescribe the PLA, a real rebellion over the benefit reductions, and now this
Where this goes for Starmer is highly unpredictable
I would never regard myself as on either the "right" or the "left" to be honest but I see more advantages for the region and the world in a non-nuclear Iran than a nuclear Iran.
That being said, regime change isn't a policy option for me - the Iranians themselves are the only ones who should decide what kind of Government under which they wish to live whether it ber theocracy, democracy or monarchy or some combination of all three.
Iran also has the right to defend itself and we should respect its territorial integrity and independence just as it must respect everyone else's.
How this plays out longer term I don't know - it will harden the resolve of those on the "left" who are opposed to the current incarnation of Labour and will see it as mark 2 Blairism but that politics electorally was pretty successful domestically.
I generally agree with your point. However, the Iranian people *cannot* decide what kind of government they live under: they do not get to vote for the supreme leader, or members of the ruling council. And they never will get that choice until there is a regime change.
Yes but the question is does a changed regime have legitimacy if the change is imposed by an external power or does it have legitimacy if it is facilitated by an external power?
There's a crucial difference - the Iranian people changing their own regime is one thing - I'd welcome it, most on here would and, if following some transitional period, they chose their next Government via a free and fair election, I'm sure, whatever that Government looked like, we would support it as a legitimate Government even if we didn't necessarily agree with all its policies.
If, however, the regime was seen to have been toppled from outside, any new Government would be tainted by that action and would lack popular legitimacy and, I suspect, would likely lose any election held because people like to be seen to be making their own decisions and running their own affairs as we apparently showed nine years ago.
Just as an aside, the theorcratic revolution in 1979 was widely supported within Iran as people at that time wanted an end to the rule of the Shah and the infamous SAVAK secret police.
Germany had a regime change imposed upon it externally in 1945 by the UK and USA and I think it was a change for the better.
There just can't be some external standard by which we can assess the legitimacy of any regime, or therefore any change of regime, or the means by which it was achieved.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
As long as you do the HR course before you lose it - that's the truly important thing.
I really lost it last time I had to do one of those courses.
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
That is indeed a cracking film. There are quite a few other Poliakoff films I've come across which really, really should get airtime on BBC4 or at the very least the iPlayer. But for BBC reasons obviously they don't.
"Stronger Than The Sun" was one I especially enjoyed.
Thanks for the recommendation! I hadn't heard of that one so will definitely check it out. Yes I can't understand why either the iPlayer or ITVX (Britbox of old) doesn't show them. I first watched Hidden City in the IMAX booth that Cambridge Library. That was a cracking institution where you could go along, get a pair of headphones and watch whatever you liked for free. I used to go and watch during my lunch hour and they had tonnes of rare stuff that still isn't easily available. It went a few years ago and is one of those little civilities that we always seem to lose these days
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
That is indeed a cracking film. There are quite a few other Poliakoff films I've come across which really, really should get airtime on BBC4 or at the very least the iPlayer. But for BBC reasons obviously they don't.
"Stronger Than The Sun" was one I especially enjoyed.
I think Poliakoff’s talent diluted the more his reputation increased. Latterly he seems more concerned with lavishly recreating the past than decent plots. Summer of Rockets was a case in point, immaculately curated wardrobe and concours old cars, not much to keep me interested past the second episode (nothing in fact).
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
That is indeed a cracking film. There are quite a few other Poliakoff films I've come across which really, really should get airtime on BBC4 or at the very least the iPlayer. But for BBC reasons obviously they don't.
"Stronger Than The Sun" was one I especially enjoyed.
Thanks for the recommendation! I hadn't heard of that one so will definitely check it out. Yes I can't understand why either the iPlayer or ITVX (Britbox of old) doesn't show them. I first watched Hidden City in the IMAX booth that Cambridge Library. That was a cracking institution where you could go along, get a pair of headphones and watch whatever you liked for free. I used to go and watch during my lunch hour and they had tonnes of rare stuff that still isn't easily available. It went a few years ago and is one of those little civilities that we always seem to lose these days
Presumably because they don't have the rights to them.
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
That is indeed a cracking film. There are quite a few other Poliakoff films I've come across which really, really should get airtime on BBC4 or at the very least the iPlayer. But for BBC reasons obviously they don't.
"Stronger Than The Sun" was one I especially enjoyed.
I think Poliakoff’s talent diluted the more his reputation increased. Latterly he seems more concerned with lavishly recreating the past than decent plots. Summer of Rockets was a case in point, immaculately curated wardrobe and concourse cars, not much to keep me interested past the second episode (nothing in fact).
I wouldn't disagree but even at his worst I find the atmosphere he creates intoxicating. His themes about the dangers lurking in the past just resonate with me for some reason.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
Well, it depends on who is counted in this report. Are we talking Whitehall civil servants or lowly employees elsewhere? Most are not going to have access to anything exciting. As long as the ones who do have access to something exciting are the ones being more cautious.
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
Thanks very much for this recommendation. I'm a big fan of both Curtis and Poliakoff but haven't seen Hidden City. Runners and Close My Eyes are both wonderful films imo.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
When I worked in govt, things which were actually a security risk had systems to render themselves unusable if they ran out of charge or would be remotely disabled. No system is foolproof but if something is such a big risk, then it shouldn't be accessible via a stolen laptop.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
Well, it depends on who is counted in this report. Are we talking Whitehall civil servants or lowly employees elsewhere? Most are not going to have access to anything exciting. As long as the ones who do have access to something exciting are the ones being more cautious.
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
Right: if loss of a laptop is going to open the government's secrets to a passing spy then the solution is to not give employees laptops to take home, because eventually somebody *will* leave one on the bus, no matter how much training you give them: humans are human. But I would assume the government is doing at least as much as the usual big corporate employer, and making the laptops all use encrypted disks, be remote wipeable, and not be allowed onto the network if they're reported stolen, and so on. And indeed the article says they are doing that. The situation is probably better than it was back in in the 70s and 80s when this was all done on paper...
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
When I worked in govt, things which were actually a security risk had systems to render themselves unusable if they ran out of charge or would be remotely disabled. No system is foolproof but if something is such a big risk, then it shouldn't be accessible via a stolen laptop.
Leaving a laptop or phone "accidentally" on a car roof was a common way of getting an upgrade.
I've only got an iPhone 57, one of my colleagues has been given the new iPhone 59, can't have that...
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
When I worked in govt, things which were actually a security risk had systems to render themselves unusable if they ran out of charge or would be remotely disabled. No system is foolproof but if something is such a big risk, then it shouldn't be accessible via a stolen laptop.
Leaving a laptop or phone "accidentally" on a car roof was a common way of getting an upgrade.
I've only got an iPhone 57, one of my colleagues has been given the new iPhone 59, can't have that...
And I've seen staff be fired for Gross Misconduct for doing just that...
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
Thanks very much for this recommendation. I'm a big fan of both Curtis and Poliakoff but haven't seen Hidden City. Runners and Close My Eyes are both wonderful films imo.
You're welcome 😊. If you're a big fan of Poliakoff then it's definitely worth buying the blu ray of Hidden City. They managed to get him to do a director's commentary and it's lovely to listen to him reminisce fondly about a very early work.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
When I worked in govt, things which were actually a security risk had systems to render themselves unusable if they ran out of charge or would be remotely disabled. No system is foolproof but if something is such a big risk, then it shouldn't be accessible via a stolen laptop.
Leaving a laptop or phone "accidentally" on a car roof was a common way of getting an upgrade.
I've only got an iPhone 57, one of my colleagues has been given the new iPhone 59, can't have that...
And I've seen staff be fired for Gross Misconduct for doing just that...
Another less drastic answer was to hand over a 10kg potato as an interim replacement.
Depends on the company / government department I guess.
I feel reassured by analysis of such sophistication. Surely now, it's all going to be OK ?
“I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of wars in the Middle East. I understand the concern. But the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents.” - JD Vance
The answer to that is surely 'Imagine how the Middle East feels'.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
Well, it depends on who is counted in this report. Are we talking Whitehall civil servants or lowly employees elsewhere? Most are not going to have access to anything exciting. As long as the ones who do have access to something exciting are the ones being more cautious.
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
Right: if loss of a laptop is going to open the government's secrets to a passing spy then the solution is to not give employees laptops to take home, because eventually somebody *will* leave one on the bus, no matter how much training you give them: humans are human. But I would assume the government is doing at least as much as the usual big corporate employer, and making the laptops all use encrypted disks, be remote wipeable, and not be allowed onto the network if they're reported stolen, and so on. And indeed the article says they are doing that. The situation is probably better than it was back in in the 70s and 80s when this was all done on paper...
I had my bag stolen in a coffee shop once. When I phoned the police I mentioned in passing that my government pass was in it (I was rather more upset about the iPad my mum bought me for my birthday) They came out in about 15 minutes which I doubt would have happened otherwise.
For those enjoying Adam Curtis's Shifty this weekend can I recommend the film Hidden City by Stephen Poliakoff. It's about someone who finds footage of what appears to be a woman's abduction in a bit of archive film footage on hop picking in Kent. The film is all about sinister things buried in a mountain of low grade government secrets and archives. It has some brilliant on location shots of old WWII tunnels under Tottenham Court road. It's just the kind of thing you could imagine Adam Curtis turning up in an archive somewhere.
Thanks very much for this recommendation. I'm a big fan of both Curtis and Poliakoff but haven't seen Hidden City. Runners and Close My Eyes are both wonderful films imo.
I quite liked the film. Charles Dance and a young actress (in the 1980s) I forget her name. It is very dated, but I have a soft spot for the 80s so I liked it.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
Well, it depends on who is counted in this report. Are we talking Whitehall civil servants or lowly employees elsewhere? Most are not going to have access to anything exciting. As long as the ones who do have access to something exciting are the ones being more cautious.
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
It's not just security stuff. A shit load of staff in the DWP for example have access to citizen data. I had access to the UC claims of anyone in the country (if I could find them), other benefit data, national insurance contributions, Hmrc income data (although that's a bit more limited) and often access to personal data of partners, adult children, carers etc. Plus quite a lot of personal medical data for PIP and UC WCAs. And I admit I used to "collect" access even for things I didn't need regularly, as gaining access when you found you needed it was a balls ache. Ever since Covid, everyone has had a cute little 13" laptop they can take home and connect to their home WiFi.
Now of course there is security, passwords etc, and systems to spot you trawling for data you don't need, but it is a huge risk.
So Vance seems to have conceded that the US does not believe it has struck the sites that store the HEU, and now hopes to strike some deal with Iran to surrender it. Good luck with that!
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
Well, it depends on who is counted in this report. Are we talking Whitehall civil servants or lowly employees elsewhere? Most are not going to have access to anything exciting. As long as the ones who do have access to something exciting are the ones being more cautious.
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
It's not just security stuff. A shit load of staff in the DWP for example have access to citizen data. I had access to the UC claims of anyone in the country (if I could find them), other benefit data, national insurance contributions, Hmrc income data (although that's a bit more limited) and often access to personal data of partners, adult children, carers etc. Plus quite a lot of personal medical data for PIP and UC WCAs. And I admit I used to "collect" access even for things I didn't need regularly, as gaining access when you found you needed it was a balls ache. Ever since Covid, everyone has had a cute little 13" laptop they can take home and connect to their home WiFi.
Now of course there is security, passwords etc, and systems to spot you trawling for data you don't need, but it is a huge risk.
In my department we had laptops way before Covid because of hot desking. In their wisdom the powers that be decided it was a good use of staff time to hunt across several buildings for an available desk every morning.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
Well, it depends on who is counted in this report. Are we talking Whitehall civil servants or lowly employees elsewhere? Most are not going to have access to anything exciting. As long as the ones who do have access to something exciting are the ones being more cautious.
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
It's not just security stuff. A shit load of staff in the DWP for example have access to citizen data. I had access to the UC claims of anyone in the country (if I could find them), other benefit data, national insurance contributions, Hmrc income data (although that's a bit more limited) and often access to personal data of partners, adult children, carers etc. Plus quite a lot of personal medical data for PIP and UC WCAs. And I admit I used to "collect" access even for things I didn't need regularly, as gaining access when you found you needed it was a balls ache. Ever since Covid, everyone has had a cute little 13" laptop they can take home and connect to their home WiFi.
Now of course there is security, passwords etc, and systems to spot you trawling for data you don't need, but it is a huge risk.
In my department we had laptops way before Covid because of hot desking. In their wisdom the powers that be decided it was a good use of staff time to hunt across several buildings for an available desk every morning.
Yep - never quite got the point of that. At my current client the Global MD decided that the perfect place for his new office was where our row of desks were so we've had to move. 4 weeks later and we've all colonised the new desks we sit at on the 2 days a week we are in the office..
It's not politically correct to use the term, "Regime Change," but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!
At my current client the Global MD decided that the perfect place for his new office was where our row of desks were so we've had to move. 4 weeks later and we've all colonised the new desks we sit at on the 2 days a week we are in the office..
Back when I worked for one of the evil outsource IT companies we had a customer who complained that we charged something like $300 to move somebody's desk (in those days it involved repatching phones and stuff). My boss at the time negotiated a new deal. We would do 200 moves a month for free, but any extra moves were now $800 a time. We billed several hundred thousand dollars in the first year cos they move people CONSTANTLY. And not just between floors or building. They would move people to cubicles on the other side of the same aisle. KERCHING !
It's not politically correct to use the term, "Regime Change," but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!
President Trump suggests he’s open to regime change in Iran “if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.” Vice President Vance said earlier the US was not seeking regime change.
They clearly didn't sit though the 1hr-long HR video I had to endure about "Don't leave you laptop on the bus, m'kay?".
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
Isn't this just a scale thing. The Government employs a lot of people, with a lot of laptops. Are they losing laptops at any faster rate than any other sector?
That is to miss the point, and I suspect the problem is that civil servants take the same view. It is not about the cost of replacing a few laptops, ipads and phones. In financial terms, the losses are trivial, not even a rounding error. There are probably more unused devices in storerooms waiting to be issued than have been lost.
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
When I worked in govt, things which were actually a security risk had systems to render themselves unusable if they ran out of charge or would be remotely disabled. No system is foolproof but if something is such a big risk, then it shouldn't be accessible via a stolen laptop.
Leaving a laptop or phone "accidentally" on a car roof was a common way of getting an upgrade.
I've only got an iPhone 57, one of my colleagues has been given the new iPhone 59, can't have that...
And I've seen staff be fired for Gross Misconduct for doing just that...
Wasn’t there a cabinet minister who did just that…
Strait of Hormuz — isn't the middle of it international waters rather than Iranian territory?
The gap is tiny, I doubt there are any international waters there.
Such passages are covered by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as 'Transit Passages'. That means that although they pass through the territorial waters of specific nations, they are free for transit under the rules of 'innocent passsage'. So nothing that can threaten the security of the states bordering the passage and no commerical activity such as fishing or drilling.
Iran is a signatory but not a party top the UNCLOS but the US is neither a party nor a signatory. Apparently they are not interested in an international law of the sea which is ironic really.
It's not politically correct to use the term, "Regime Change," but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!
President Trump suggests he’s open to regime change in Iran “if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.” Vice President Vance said earlier the US was not seeking regime change.
All that beautiful Iranian coastline would be perfect for a Trump resort.
Strait of Hormuz — isn't the middle of it international waters rather than Iranian territory?
The gap is tiny, I doubt there are any international waters there.
Such passages are covered by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as 'Transit Passages'. That means that although they pass through the territorial waters of specific nations, they are free for transit under the rules of 'innocent passsage'. So nothing that can threaten the security of the states bordering the passage and no commerical activity such as fishing or drilling.
Iran is a signatory but not a party top the UNCLOS but the US is neither a party nor a signatory. Apparently they are not interested in an international law of the sea which is ironic really.
It's the "law is for little people" thing, or "international law is for little countries". In recent decades, it seems reasonable to assume that American ships can mostly go wherever they damn well please.
That sort of status is great to play with while you have it, but it's foolish to assume that you will forever. There's a reason that few people really want to live under the Pirate Law.
That's one person - if you know anyone who has had a caesarean section you would know that thw minimum time needs to be at least 6 weeks to give the mother time to recover..
Sky News were saying that it appears they might have dropped the bombs down ventilation shafts that were a weak point....has somebody at sky been watching a certain movie over the weekend
Sky News were saying that it appears they might have dropped the bombs down ventilation shafts that were a weak point....has somebody at sky been watching a certain movie over the weekend
Hasn't that been a known issue since about 1977 - you would have thought over the past 48 years people would have avoided that design flaw..
That's one person - if you know anyone who has had a caesarean section you would know that thw minimum time needs to be at least 6 weeks to give the mother time to recover..
I was speaking more generally, and though perhaps I was being a little controversial, I didn't argue with anybody needing the time to assist with someone recovering from a ceasarian.
Also that thread is quite the nostalgia-fest - from those halcyon days when Starmer was seen as just a bit crap.
Strait of Hormuz — isn't the middle of it international waters rather than Iranian territory?
The gap is tiny, I doubt there are any international waters there.
Such passages are covered by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as 'Transit Passages'. That means that although they pass through the territorial waters of specific nations, they are free for transit under the rules of 'innocent passsage'. So nothing that can threaten the security of the states bordering the passage and no commerical activity such as fishing or drilling.
Iran is a signatory but not a party top the UNCLOS but the US is neither a party nor a signatory. Apparently they are not interested in an international law of the sea which is ironic really.
I imagine Iran would claim a right to self defence. America has just dropped a dozen enormous bombs on its territory.
By "close Hormuz Strait" presumably there's a line across the sea Iran will not permit ships to cross. The question is what it will do to stop vessels if they try. Measures could go from boarding them to firing a missile at them. I guess it won't take too much persuasion to dissuade most ships.
Green levies on energy to be abandoned for manufacturing industry.
Ed Miliband on resignation watch?
There were also reports that government wanted to legislate to ensure new oil / gas in North sea would get permits such that legal challenges over net zero wouldn't work
Green levies on energy to be abandoned for manufacturing industry.
Ed Miliband on resignation watch?
Doubt it. Love him or think he will lose Labour the 2029 election like he lost 2015, at least Ed Miliband got things done. Stay inside and he might still have a squeak at replacing Starmer.
VANCE: "Our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change."
HEGSETH: "This mission was not and has not been about regime change."
RUBIO: Regime change is "certainly not the goal of what we're working on here."
TRUMP: Why wouldn't there be regime change?
Hey MAGA, you've been lied to all along.
It's not just the hypocrisy and deceit, how the hell is a diplomatic solution meant to happen when one side is lead by a total moron who changes his views at the drop of a hat? Iran will never trust any deal they sign, they will only sign a deal to buy time, but work on the assumption that they will be deceived, or simply Trump will forget what he agreed to and change tack.
I'll be amazed if Iran doesn't end up with the bomb now. I expect many other countries will be making plans as well, as any belief that things like the NPT, international law, or merely prior conduct, can be relied upon to protect them are now shot to pieces.
VANCE: "Our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change."
HEGSETH: "This mission was not and has not been about regime change."
RUBIO: Regime change is "certainly not the goal of what we're working on here."
TRUMP: Why wouldn't there be regime change?
Hey MAGA, you've been lied to all along.
It's not just the hypocrisy and deceit, how the hell is a diplomatic solution meant to happen when one side is lead by a total moron who changes his views at the drop of a hat? Iran will never trust any deal they sign, they will only sign a deal to buy time, but work on the assumption that they will be deceived, or simply Trump will forget what he agreed to and change tack.
I'll be amazed if Iran doesn't end up with the bomb now. I expect many other countries will be making plans as well, as any belief that things like the NPT, international law, or merely prior conduct, can be relied upon to protect them are now shot to pieces.
None of Israel, Iran and the USA are good faith actors. Honestly I don't think Iran is the worst of the three.
"Here’s how it works: every high-net-worth newcomer (or returning leaver) will pay a £250,000 one-off entry contribution in return for a stable, indefinite remittance-style regime on offshore income and a 20-year inheritance-tax shield. Crucially, 100 per cent of this contribution is hypothecated to Britain’s lowest-paid full-time workers, delivered automatically by HMRC as a tax-free cash dividend."
VANCE: "Our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change."
HEGSETH: "This mission was not and has not been about regime change."
RUBIO: Regime change is "certainly not the goal of what we're working on here."
TRUMP: Why wouldn't there be regime change?
Hey MAGA, you've been lied to all along.
It's not just the hypocrisy and deceit, how the hell is a diplomatic solution meant to happen when one side is lead by a total moron who changes his views at the drop of a hat? Iran will never trust any deal they sign, they will only sign a deal to buy time, but work on the assumption that they will be deceived, or simply Trump will forget what he agreed to and change tack.
I'll be amazed if Iran doesn't end up with the bomb now. I expect many other countries will be making plans as well, as any belief that things like the NPT, international law, or merely prior conduct, can be relied upon to protect them are now shot to pieces.
None of Israel, Iran and the USA are good faith actors. Honestly I don't think Iran is the worst of the three.
Comments
I thoroughly expect US and Israeli intelligence on the facility to be accurate, and that the precision attack was also accurate.
I am very uneasy about the bombings, but can see that Iran has stalled for years whilst sponsoring terror across the Middle East
Maybe a debate should be had by those critical of Trump as to what is their alternative?
Having a place in history is not always because you are remembered positively
So destroying them would just aggravate some large spiders. Having met some large, Middle Eastern spiders, this is not something you do lightly.
So a question is whether Iran have only used their refinement processes as a way of getting something off their enemies, or if they really want nukes. I reckon the latter, as the sanctions cost them more than they get in the way of concessions for stopping work.
He is also as VP just a Trump heart attack or impeachment and conviction away from the Presidency. If I was Vance I would be having regular lunches with POTUS with burgers and fries, laying on the salt thickly
“Genghis . . . Khan? Was he of the Sardauker, m’Lord?”
“Oh, long before that. He killed . . . perhaps four million.”
“He must’ve had formidable weaponry to kill that many, Sire. Lasbeams, perhaps, or . . .”
“He didn’t kill them himself, Sil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions. There’s another emperor I want you to note in passing — a Hitler. He killed more than six million. Pretty good for those days.”
“Killed . . . by his legions?” Stilgar asked.
“Yes.”
“Not very impressive statistics, m’Lord.”
The Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs used by the RAF during WWII were often used in this way. The Germans built structures with immensely thick concrete roofs, up to 30m thick, to resist penetration bombs. So the RAF responded by aiming their bombs to just miss the target, so the resulting ground collapse would then undermine the structure and cause it to break apart.
It's pretty obvious once some failed am-dram people have re-enacted just how bad they feel at losing their big clunky laptop. Not to mention that USB stick they handed to a stranger. Or the rando they let into their top security server room.
Apparently, all very easily done.
You know this, William. Don't play dumb. We know you're not. It's just getting embarrassing.
Oh, wait...
@Reuters
US urges China to dissuade Iran from closing Strait of Hormuz
https://x.com/Reuters/status/1936868078022701219
"Stronger Than The Sun" was one I especially enjoyed.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076775/
Some great performances in there.
The alternative was to negotiate inspections in exchange for reducing sanctions etc. We tried that, hard to say if it was working tbh, certainly Iran didn't develop a nuclear weapon already...
The trouble is security. Some of these devices might give access to government systems. And here again, if a phone has been swiped by the usual phone thieves, no harm done; same with laptops.
But if these devices have been stolen by foreign spies who have been staking out Whitehall pubs and restaurants looking for devices left at the end of Winetime Friday, then the jig is up.
"PETER HITCHENS: Don't celebrate this ultra-violence. Trump's broken all the rules and plunged us into a forever war" (£)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14836275/PETER-HITCHENS-Dont-celebrate-ultra-violence-Trumps-broken-rules-plunged-forever-war.html
Also, swiping a device is not going to get you access if you don't have a password.
I've only got an iPhone 57, one of my colleagues has been given the new iPhone 59, can't have that...
Depends on the company / government department I guess.
Now of course there is security, passwords etc, and systems to spot you trawling for data you don't need, but it is a huge risk.
It's not politically correct to use the term, "Regime Change," but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!
President Trump suggests he’s open to regime change in Iran “if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.” Vice President Vance said earlier the US was not seeking regime change.
Iran is a signatory but not a party top the UNCLOS but the US is neither a party nor a signatory. Apparently they are not interested in an international law of the sea which is ironic really.
https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1936894717595099456
https://x.com/PaulleyTicks/status/1936659813456564567
VANCE: "Our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change."
HEGSETH: "This mission was not and has not been about regime change."
RUBIO: Regime change is "certainly not the goal of what we're working on here."
TRUMP: Why wouldn't there be regime change?
Remember the abject HORROR when I dared to suggest that 5 weeks of paternity leave would be annoying for the mum?
Well...
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/please-dont-give-my-husband-longer-paternity-leave/
That sort of status is great to play with while you have it, but it's foolish to assume that you will forever. There's a reason that few people really want to live under the Pirate Law.
@SpencerHakimian
What JD Vance did in the past 24 hours was very strategic and clearly aimed for 2028.
https://x.com/SpencerHakimian/status/1936844802168926376
Also that thread is quite the nostalgia-fest - from those halcyon days when Starmer was seen as just a bit crap.
By "close Hormuz Strait" presumably there's a line across the sea Iran will not permit ships to cross. The question is what it will do to stop vessels if they try. Measures could go from boarding them to firing a missile at them. I guess it won't take too much persuasion to dissuade most ships.
Green levies on energy to be abandoned for manufacturing industry.
Ed Miliband on resignation watch?
*To be out earning enough money so we can afford a nanny. Then boarding school.
I'll be amazed if Iran doesn't end up with the bomb now. I expect many other countries will be making plans as well, as any belief that things like the NPT, international law, or merely prior conduct, can be relied upon to protect them are now shot to pieces.
@RobertJenrick
·
2h
This weekend I did the Three Peaks Challenge.
Ben Nevis 🏴 Scafell Pike 🏴 and Snowdon 🏴 in 24 hours.
How lucky we are to live in the most beautiful country in the world 🇬🇧
https://x.com/RobertJenrick/status/1936877664234779047
===
Quite an achievement to be honest in this heat.
"Here’s how it works: every high-net-worth newcomer (or returning leaver) will pay a £250,000 one-off entry contribution in return for a stable, indefinite remittance-style regime on offshore income and a 20-year inheritance-tax shield. Crucially, 100 per cent of this contribution is hypothecated to Britain’s lowest-paid full-time workers, delivered automatically by HMRC as a tax-free cash dividend."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/06/22/nigel-farage-reform-non-dom-status-help-low-earners/
He claims it will be £600-1000 a year
bribedividend for 2.5 million people....I presume no furrrneiers will be eligible.@acnewsitics
It's a cult.
https://x.com/acnewsitics/status/1936870613144261020