Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Blimey, that sounds so familiar that I had to check it wasn't me.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
If you can show me 50,000 far right wing people shouting “death to x” at a music festival “dedicated to peace” then you’d have a point. But you can’t show me that because it hasn’t happened
You’re not having a good day. Have a lie down
You aren't so dim as to not grasp my (clear and straightforward) point so I'll take this as an "ok guv, fair cop" and move on.
I wonder if Rod will address Israel/Palestine today? Or will he be scared off by the controversy over Vylan and Knee?
Why would he? 90% of artists steer well clear of this shite whatever they think about it. Get on the stage, sing your songs, and fuck off.
That's a harsh way to treat Sir Rod. Surely he can bask in the glow for a couple of minutes when he's finished.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
"Glastonbury 'appalled' by Bob Vylan IDF comments"
They're appalled at the bad publicity rather than with what he said.
A BBC spokesperson previously said some of the comments were "deeply offensive", adding it had issued a warning on screen about "very strong and discriminatory language".
I wonder if an artist went on a racist tirade about a prominent black individual they would be saying well we did warn you there might be "discriminatory language".
I find it amazing they don't have the 7s delay technology that they use during most live tv and radio to cut exactly this stuff out.
Combining this thread and the tail end of the last, we should not overlook snobbery in the media.
Most ‘serious’ political journalists working for the broadsheets and broadcasters were educated alongside politicians at Oxford, which led to a snobbish contempt for those who were not, such as Jim Callaghan, Neil Kinnock and John Major.
Kinnock read at the University of Wales for goodness sake.
Which is not Oxbridge, or even Durham or Edinburgh or UCL or LSE
I suspect Kings London would demand you remove UCL from your list. I am surprised you considered any nasty red brick polys.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
Combining this thread and the tail end of the last, we should not overlook snobbery in the media.
Most ‘serious’ political journalists working for the broadsheets and broadcasters were educated alongside politicians at Oxford, which led to a snobbish contempt for those who were not, such as Jim Callaghan, Neil Kinnock and John Major.
Kinnock read at the University of Wales for goodness sake.
Which is not Oxbridge, or even Durham or Edinburgh or UCL or LSE
I suspect Kings London would demand you remove UCL from your list. I am surprised you considered any nasty red brick polys.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
True, but my point was about Britain and Britishness
Combining this thread and the tail end of the last, we should not overlook snobbery in the media.
Most ‘serious’ political journalists working for the broadsheets and broadcasters were educated alongside politicians at Oxford, which led to a snobbish contempt for those who were not, such as Jim Callaghan, Neil Kinnock and John Major.
Kinnock read at the University of Wales for goodness sake.
Which is not Oxbridge, or even Durham or Edinburgh or UCL or LSE
I suspect Kings London would demand you remove UCL from your list. I am surprised you considered any nasty red brick polys.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Just the Palestinian flag and a kaleidoscope of rainbow flags.
We are rich beyond our wildest dream...oh no it seems I have won a Mars Bar.
Thousands in Norway told they won up to millions in lottery error
An error in the conversion from Eurocents to Norwegian kroner caused the prize amounts to be "excessively high", the company said. The amount was multiplied by 100, instead of being divided by 100, local media reported.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
Combining this thread and the tail end of the last, we should not overlook snobbery in the media.
Most ‘serious’ political journalists working for the broadsheets and broadcasters were educated alongside politicians at Oxford, which led to a snobbish contempt for those who were not, such as Jim Callaghan, Neil Kinnock and John Major.
Kinnock read at the University of Wales for goodness sake.
Which is not Oxbridge, or even Durham or Edinburgh or UCL or LSE
I suspect Kings London would demand you remove UCL from your list. I am surprised you considered any nasty red brick polys.
Why?
It's a bit Oxford v Cambridge.
Strand Poly v Bloomsbury Poly.
I don’t really remember us giving Kings any thought.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
The “burn down their hostels” tweeter got 31 months in prison, I think that was what people were outraged about. If Bob Vylan got the same I’d say it was too harsh as well
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
I don't believe anyone has suggested gaol for participants in these distasteful public events.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Can Iron Maiden still do it live? I saw them maybe 10 years ago and they were still good then.
Combining this thread and the tail end of the last, we should not overlook snobbery in the media.
Most ‘serious’ political journalists working for the broadsheets and broadcasters were educated alongside politicians at Oxford, which led to a snobbish contempt for those who were not, such as Jim Callaghan, Neil Kinnock and John Major.
Kinnock read at the University of Wales for goodness sake.
Which is not Oxbridge, or even Durham or Edinburgh or UCL or LSE
I suspect Kings London would demand you remove UCL from your list. I am surprised you considered any nasty red brick polys.
Why?
It's a bit Oxford v Cambridge.
Strand Poly v Bloomsbury Poly.
I don’t really remember us giving Kings any thought.
Isn't there an apocryphal story that Jeremy Bentham's head is missing because it was stolen by Kings students? You were at Gower Street Poly? So was Leon.
The SiC semiconductor market - which was to have been a driver of industry growth in the west - seems to have to gone the same way as solar. China has pretty well wiped out the competition.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That’s as insightful as people who claim young people cannot afford a home as they spend all their money on Costa Coffee and Avocado.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
I don't believe anyone has suggested gaol for participants in these distasteful public events.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
The “burn down their hostels” tweeter got 31 months in prison, I think that was what people were outraged about. If Bob Vylan got the same I’d say it was too harsh as well
She didn't mean it, and she removed the post. I read that on PB.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
I don't believe anyone has suggested gaol for participants in these distasteful public events.
"Glastonbury 'appalled' by Bob Vylan IDF comments"
The sound of running for cover. There are some big brands and names at risk of trashing here. Glasto, BBC, pop stars I have never heard of, politicians who tell us how marvellous this borefest is, millions of luvvies. Do I feel a faint subtext of anti Semitism in the air? Is there a 'Remember the Holocaust' bench alongside the 'Free Palestine' one??
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
He's a bit of an idiot. He says he wants Ukraine to win the war but would never think of calling for the death of Russian soldiers. Really? How else does he think Ukraine is going to win?
I must have missed Thatcher 'calling for the death' of Argentinian soldiers. You can take regrettable but necessary military actions without behaving like a shandy-fuelled Bartholomew Roberts.
We'll, of course politicians don't say that sort of thing, because it isn't politic.
You can't win a war without killing the enemy. I see no reason to try to hide that. Joe public should be able to say it. If you support one side in a war, you want enemy soldiers to die.
I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for this. Free speech and all that. I’m dubious you can incite violence against an army at war
However it is the optics that are shocking. Seeing 50,000 people chanting “death to X” is seriously disturbing and grotesque. It simply IS. Have you seen the footage? It’s grim. It wouid be grim if they were shouting “death to the Russian army!”
Huge crowds calling “death to anyone” is ugly and inhuman - and this at a music festival once dedicated to peace? Ugh
It’s doing terrible damage to the Glastonbury brand - it’s going viral worldwide - which is why they are now hastily trying to make amends. I can see serious problems with their corporate sponsors and also for the BBC
Good
And don't tell me, because I know already, this toxic chanting at Glasto is immeasurably worse than all the "burn down their hostels!" stuff from the white race rioters last summer because at least those guys weren't pretending to be all peace and love and kumbaya. They were authentic unlike this bunch of hypocrites. That's why this bothers you so much more than that did.
Were there posters suggesting those riots were nothing to worry about? I don't think they were. But I do think you're right to highlight the equivalence.
Well not *equivalent* since that involved direct threats and violent actions.
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
The “burn down their hostels” tweeter got 31 months in prison, I think that was what people were outraged about. If Bob Vylan got the same I’d say it was too harsh as well
Yes, but we're at x purposes. I'm contrasting the online reaction of Leon and Leons to the riots when they were happening to the reaction of same to this Glasto chanting.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Bruce Dickinson was waving a large Union Jack as part of the show.
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Yes and no. Certainly there is little attempt to explain honestly the situation, $15bn black hole nonsense when you borrow more than that in a month. However, the economy hasn't been growing for years, until it does, you are never going to escape the cycle even if you do cut back the state somewhat.
I am not sure the electorate are close to wanting to hear the truth though. See the reaction to the suggestion at the GE that perhaps we shouldn't send quite so many kids to university...and now the WFA or benefit cuts, when the pension went up more than the WFA cut and the benefit cuts would effect people but aren't that large in terms of the overall budgets.
I agree this is 'yes and no'. Syed isn't blaming 'hopeless leaders or weak PMs', he isn't blaming himself as he is one of the enlightened, he isn't blaming his readers who are clearly 'we' and not 'they' and also amonmg the illuminati. He can't point the finger at PBers who are as well.
What's left? Some other rather unnamed people who are a bit dim, entitled and in denial. Gosh.
It seems to me that dealing with unreality and getting people to where they are not very willing to go is exactly what the claim to legitimate leadership is about. Most of us don't think we are up to it, at PM/CoE level. Those that are there are making that claim to leadership. Syed absolves them too fast. I cannot see how else his wish can be fulfilled except by outstanding leadership.
The People have forfeit the confidence of The Political Class
Like all things that go wrong, it's a confluence of factors.
Being a politician is shit. Therefore it doesn't attract the talent it used to. Therefore, we get shit leaders. Therefore the world gets a little worse, and we trust politicians a little less.
Rinse and repeat until we get someone really awful
Indeed.
It’s just farcical when the clowns think the problem is audience.
The audience does become the problem when it becomes impossible to deliver what it wants. The current audience demands more of everything paid for by somebody else. Short of an economic miracle no government is going to satisfy the current audience.
We have sadly got to the state where a government can only get elected by lying to the voters. It should therefore come as no surprise that we get the governments that we do and deservedly so.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Bruce Dickinson was waving a large Union Jack as part of the show.
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
I got flown home by him form holiday when the airline I was booked on collapsed and they had to scramble a lot of charter planes / pilots.
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Yes and no. Certainly there is little attempt to explain honestly the situation, $15bn black hole nonsense when you borrow more than that in a month. However, the economy hasn't been growing for years, until it does, you are never going to escape the cycle even if you do cut back the state somewhat.
I am not sure the electorate are close to wanting to hear the truth though. See the reaction to the suggestion at the GE that perhaps we shouldn't send quite so many kids to university...and now the WFA or benefit cuts, when the pension went up more than the WFA cut and the benefit cuts would effect people but aren't that large in terms of the overall budgets.
I agree this is 'yes and no'. Syed isn't blaming 'hopeless leaders or weak PMs', he isn't blaming himself as he is one of the enlightened, he isn't blaming his readers who are clearly 'we' and not 'they' and also amonmg the illuminati. He can't point the finger at PBers who are as well.
What's left? Some other rather unnamed people who are a bit dim, entitled and in denial. Gosh.
It seems to me that dealing with unreality and getting people to where they are not very willing to go is exactly what the claim to legitimate leadership is about. Most of us don't think we are up to it, at PM/CoE level. Those that are there are making that claim to leadership. Syed absolves them too fast. I cannot see how else his wish can be fulfilled except by outstanding leadership.
The People have forfeit the confidence of The Political Class
Like all things that go wrong, it's a confluence of factors.
Being a politician is shit. Therefore it doesn't attract the talent it used to. Therefore, we get shit leaders. Therefore the world gets a little worse, and we trust politicians a little less.
Rinse and repeat until we get someone really awful
Indeed.
It’s just farcical when the clowns think the problem is audience.
The audience does become the problem when it becomes impossible to deliver what it wants. The current audience demands more of everything paid for by somebody else. Short of an economic miracle no government is going to satisfy the current audience.
We have sadly got to the state where a government can only get elected by lying to the voters. It should therefore come as no surprise that we get the governments that we do and deservedly so.
Not proven.
We have had various governments, from the major parties, who have claimed to be all about “tough choices”. Except for any choices that are er… tough. And are useless with it.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Yes and no. Certainly there is little attempt to explain honestly the situation, $15bn black hole nonsense when you borrow more than that in a month. However, the economy hasn't been growing for years, until it does, you are never going to escape the cycle even if you do cut back the state somewhat.
I am not sure the electorate are close to wanting to hear the truth though. See the reaction to the suggestion at the GE that perhaps we shouldn't send quite so many kids to university...and now the WFA or benefit cuts, when the pension went up more than the WFA cut and the benefit cuts would effect people but aren't that large in terms of the overall budgets.
I agree this is 'yes and no'. Syed isn't blaming 'hopeless leaders or weak PMs', he isn't blaming himself as he is one of the enlightened, he isn't blaming his readers who are clearly 'we' and not 'they' and also amonmg the illuminati. He can't point the finger at PBers who are as well.
What's left? Some other rather unnamed people who are a bit dim, entitled and in denial. Gosh.
It seems to me that dealing with unreality and getting people to where they are not very willing to go is exactly what the claim to legitimate leadership is about. Most of us don't think we are up to it, at PM/CoE level. Those that are there are making that claim to leadership. Syed absolves them too fast. I cannot see how else his wish can be fulfilled except by outstanding leadership.
The People have forfeit the confidence of The Political Class
Like all things that go wrong, it's a confluence of factors.
Being a politician is shit. Therefore it doesn't attract the talent it used to. Therefore, we get shit leaders. Therefore the world gets a little worse, and we trust politicians a little less.
Rinse and repeat until we get someone really awful
Indeed.
It’s just farcical when the clowns think the problem is audience.
The audience does become the problem when it becomes impossible to deliver what it wants. The current audience demands more of everything paid for by somebody else. Short of an economic miracle no government is going to satisfy the current audience.
We have sadly got to the state where a government can only get elected by lying to the voters. It should therefore come as no surprise that we get the governments that we do and deservedly so.
Totally agree. The best thing any politician in or seeking office could do is credibly and powerfully lower expectations. That is what this 'true leader' I keep hearing about would do. That's the real 'vision thing'. The 'narrative' we need to have scripted and sold.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
So sorry. You have every right to feel angry & let down
"the names of Jewish industry executives who had signed a letter to Glastonbury concerned about Kneecap was leaked to the band, even though it was marked private. Then each of them had their names and emails released publicly. They received multiple death threats and even some faced the threat of losing their jobs."
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
Does everyone agree the next Labour leader is probably either Rayner or Streeting? I can't think of any other likely candidates atm.
Yes unless Burnham returns to Parliament, of the 2 Labour members probably elect Rayner so Blairites will want to keep Starmer in post for now
Streeting is well placed, provided it never comes out that he's behind some of the anti-Starmer leaking going on recently
Is he? Unlike the Tories, Labour leadership elections always have to go to the membership if contested, MPs alone can't pick a candidate as the Tories did when they picked Sunak in autumn 2022.
The latest Labourlist poll has Burnham first choice of 29%, then Rayner with 20% then Streeting with a mere 8% only just ahead of Cooper and Lewis on 5%.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Bruce Dickinson was waving a large Union Jack as part of the show.
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
Wasn’t Brucie the Brexiteer who made a big whine about Brexit spoiling his touring? He certainly puts one part of his surname into Dickinson.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Bruce Dickinson was waving a large Union Jack as part of the show.
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
Wasn’t Brucie the Brexiteer who made a big whine about Brexit spoiling his touring? He certainly puts one part of his surname into Dickinson.
"The trick in fishing is a lure that the fish can't resist."
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
I’m so sorry to hear what you’ve been going through. It’s fxcking awful .
I feel very sympathetic to Ms Cyclefree. The surgeon told me, back in Sept 22 that if he didn’t operate I’d be completely paralysed and bedridden in six months. So, of course, I said go ahead and in Oct of that year he did. According to the schedule I was given afterwards things are as good as they’re going to get. I can walk, with a ‘walker’ or Zimmer frame, quite a long way. Around 500 steps on a good day. At least that’s as far as the nearest pub! I can’t stand, or take more than a few steps, unaided. I type with one finger; two if it’s a good day. I can’t shower, or do or anything else in the bathroom unaided. I’ve been told I’m unfit to drive.
But I’m keeping going.
So, Ms Cyclefree, nil desperandum. Keep, as someone said, buggering on. Once you get sorted, and it does sometimes seem forever before you do, you’ll find there are all sorts of help you can get.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Bruce Dickinson was waving a large Union Jack as part of the show.
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
Wasn’t Brucie the Brexiteer who made a big whine about Brexit spoiling his touring? He certainly puts one part of his surname into Dickinson.
"The trick in fishing is a lure that the fish can't resist."
I fished off a flat-bottomed (to bounce off the hippo) speedboat (that way overeggs it) type thing in Botswana many years ago - just throw a hook with a fly into the water and the fish queue up to be had for dinner. I thought it was very interesting that the local risk/reward priorities had become so slanted that becoming a bigger fish quickly was pretty much the overwhelming theme rather than any degree of caution.
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
Always great to hear from you @Cyclefree. I very much hope things are going well.
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Blimey, that sounds so familiar that I had to check it wasn't me.
You do tend to be rather selective in your mission to curb government expenditure though. When the issue was raised of the £40bn a year the BOE (paid by the Treasury) pays to commercial banks in interest on their QE holdings (unlike other central banks), you declared that that was necessary to support the banking industry - or words to that effect.
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
On reading the header, my first thought was rather than lawyers, we should look at sons and daughters of the manse, but other than May, Thatcher and Brown, I could not find any.
One advantage lawyers do have as MPs is understanding the legalese in which bills are written. The drawback might be they are too keen to ban things of which they disapprove; to legislate rather than persuade.
It is voters who tend to want to ban things.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
You have my sympathies for the difficult times, both endured and to come. I sympathise with your outrage that after doing all the right things you have somehow ended up with stage four cancer. I was diagnosed at 39 with APML (a type of leukemia). Luckily for me it’s now a very treatable disease with a great prognosis, but I still couldn’t understand why it had happened to me. At the time I ran three times a week, including marathons and half marathons, played football, cricket. I drank, but not excessively (a few pints a week) and ate mostly a decent diet. I became fixated on the wire in my knee from an injury to the extent that I almost wanted it removed, but gradually made my peace with it. As I tell my third years on the oncology unit despite what health professionals tell you, and the many state, only around 40% of cancers are linked to lifestyle. The rest - we don’t yet know why, although random chance in mutations, unknown reactions to viral infection, and other mechanisms will cover a lot. In the end you were just unlucky, and it sucks. But while there is life, there is hope and we all, I am certain, wish you many more years of ascerbic comment and common sense.
I feel very sympathetic to Ms Cyclefree. The surgeon told me, back in Sept 22 that if he didn’t operate I’d be completely paralysed and bedridden in six months. So, of course, I said go ahead and in Oct of that year he did. According to the schedule I was given afterwards things are as good as they’re going to get. I can walk, with a ‘walker’ or Zimmer frame, quite a long way. Around 500 steps on a good day. At least that’s as far as the nearest pub! I can’t stand, or take more than a few steps, unaided. I type with one finger; two if it’s a good day. I can’t shower, or do or anything else in the bathroom unaided. I’ve been told I’m unfit to drive.
But I’m keeping going.
So, Ms Cyclefree, nil desperandum. Keep, as someone said, buggering on. Once you get sorted, and it does sometimes seem forever before you do, you’ll find there are all sorts of help you can get.
It’s funny because Reform claim they are the patriotic party but my impression is that Reform voters seem to hate what Britain actually is. Hence this almost irrational desperation to return to the Britain of their youth through the rose-tined glasses.
That's such a tendentious framing. Did people who wanted desperately to get the Tories out "hate what Britain actually is"?
The liberal left don’t tend to wank themselves silly over the flag
Depends which flag.
Was at the Iron Maiden concert last night, incidentally.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
Flags should be banned at concerts...nothing to do with what is on the flags, but I can't f##king see the thing I have paid a load of money to see because the dicks are waving them around.
Bruce Dickinson was waving a large Union Jack as part of the show.
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
Wasn’t Brucie the Brexiteer who made a big whine about Brexit spoiling his touring? He certainly puts one part of his surname into Dickinson.
"The trick in fishing is a lure that the fish can't resist."
I fished off a flat-bottomed (to bounce off the hippo) speedboat (that way overeggs it) type thing in Botswana many years ago - just throw a hook with a fly into the water and the fish queue up to be had for dinner. I thought it was very interesting that the local risk/reward priorities had become so slanted that becoming a bigger fish quickly was pretty much the overwhelming theme rather than any degree of caution.
Sounds like little hook fishing has happened there - do the locals use nets?
It’s common in fisheries which aren’t fished much for fish to try anything - stories of bare hooks etc.
As fishing becomes regular, the selection pressure makes the fish harder to catch.
The locals were hippos. Middle of nowhere in the Okavanga Delta - probably still like that as it was very remote. Obviously there were locals, but the floodlands aren't anywhere they bother with so far as I can tell.
Anyway it's not my only fishing tale, but it's about a million percent better than my 'went to canal and caught a gudgeon one'.
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Blimey, that sounds so familiar that I had to check it wasn't me.
You do tend to be rather selective in your mission to curb government expenditure though. When the issue was raised of the £40bn a year the BOE (paid by the Treasury) pays to commercial banks in interest on their QE holdings (unlike other central banks), you declared that that was necessary to support the banking industry - or words to that effect.
No, I merely said that we needed to distinguish between real money and paper transactions. The Bank issued that debt. Banks bought it. They are entitled to their interest on it even although the bank effectively printed it.
Not paying that money would be a default. That may come but it will be disastrous when it does. We don't need to do that right now.
The £40bn you are talking about arises because the gilts bought by the Banks are worth more now than they were at the date of issue so early repayment costs, just like cancelling a fixed term mortgage. But its still created money. It is still a consequence of a very dangerous policy (QE) which we need to face up to. We need to close Pandora's box. If politicians think that playing with the boxes contents is risk free we will all pay a terrible price.
My wife and I were there on our honeymoon in May 1964
Norway before they discovered oil must have been interesting. It was my first visit to the country.
It was clearly a very poor country, with most of the population earning a subsistence living from farming or fishing or herding, plus logging. The transformation that occurred as the oil revenues started flowing in is remarkable, and older Norwegians still comment upon it. You also pick up the former hard, poor lives of ordinary Norwegians from the museums and from many of the wartime stories from those parachuted in to help out the resistance here.
Interestingly this morning I was told that it was an American firm that discovered oil in the North Sea at the end of the 1960s, and much that was then in Norwegian waters had been British waters just two years earlier. The suggestion was that the change in maritime boundaries took place just before anyone knew about the oil, and hence Norway was very lucky. I don’t know anything more about this and wonder whether it’s an accurate story?
I've been watching Glasto for an hour. It has been dire, particularly Pete Doherty. But now we have Nile Rogers. Absolutely sublime!
The production value is a million times better than what I saw before.
My eldest daughter was obsessed with Pete Doherty as a teenager. She went all around the country to watch him play live and became friends with him and Amy when she was a student in London. It was a very difficult time in her life as I am sure you can imagine. I thought he had some poetical ability but he has not aged well.
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Blimey, that sounds so familiar that I had to check it wasn't me.
You do tend to be rather selective in your mission to curb government expenditure though. When the issue was raised of the £40bn a year the BOE (paid by the Treasury) pays to commercial banks in interest on their QE holdings (unlike other central banks), you declared that that was necessary to support the banking industry - or words to that effect.
No, I merely said that we needed to distinguish between real money and paper transactions. The Bank issued that debt. Banks bought it. They are entitled to their interest on it even although the bank effectively printed it.
Not paying that money would be a default. That may come but it will be disastrous when it does. We don't need to do that right now.
The £40bn you are talking about arises because the gilts bought by the Banks are worth more now than they were at the date of issue so early repayment costs, just like cancelling a fixed term mortgage. But its still created money. It is still a consequence of a very dangerous policy (QE) which we need to face up to. We need to close Pandora's box. If politicians think that playing with the boxes contents is risk free we will all pay a terrible price.
'Real money' isn't something we've had in ages - perhaps never.
QE is/was just money printing. The BoE need to just own up to that and stop the charade. The administration of which undoubtedly costs a lot of money anyway.
But money is its own nonsense and we have to simply decide where to draw the line. On the whole, despite my reservations I'd draw the line bang on where it is now - I have 'money' at risk after all.
I've been watching Glasto for an hour. It has been dire, particularly Pete Doherty. But now we have Nile Rogers. Absolutely sublime!
The production value is a million times better than what I saw before.
My eldest daughter was obsessed with Pete Doherty as a teenager. She went all around the country to watch him play live and became friends with him and Amy when she was a student in London. It was a very difficult time in her life as I am sure you can imagine. I thought he had some poetical ability but he has not aged well.
I had assumed his main claim to fame was as Kate Moss's one-time squeeze. I may have underestimated him, although perhaps not.
I've been watching Glasto for an hour. It has been dire, particularly Pete Doherty. But now we have Nile Rogers. Absolutely sublime!
The production value is a million times better than what I saw before.
My eldest daughter was obsessed with Pete Doherty as a teenager. She went all around the country to watch him play live and became friends with him and Amy when she was a student in London. It was a very difficult time in her life as I am sure you can imagine. I thought he had some poetical ability but he has not aged well.
I had assumed his main claim to fame was as Kate Moss's one-time squeeze. I may have underestimated him, although perhaps not.
Being a friend of @DavidL's daughter - and @DavidL having been mentioned in a PB header by @Cyclefree seems fame enough.
I've been watching Glasto for an hour. It has been dire, particularly Pete Doherty. But now we have Nile Rogers. Absolutely sublime!
The production value is a million times better than what I saw before.
My eldest daughter was obsessed with Pete Doherty as a teenager. She went all around the country to watch him play live and became friends with him and Amy when she was a student in London. It was a very difficult time in her life as I am sure you can imagine. I thought he had some poetical ability but he has not aged well.
I had assumed his main claim to fame was as Kate Moss's one-time squeeze. I may have underestimated him, although perhaps not.
Being a friend of @DavidL's daughter - and @DavidL having been mentioned in a PB header by @Cyclefree seems fame enough.
My wife and I were there on our honeymoon in May 1964
Norway before they discovered oil must have been interesting. It was my first visit to the country.
It was clearly a very poor country, with most of the population earning a subsistence living from farming or fishing or herding, plus logging. The transformation that occurred as the oil revenues started flowing in is remarkable, and older Norwegians still comment upon it.
Not really true. Norway in 1938 had a higher GDP/head than the UK.
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
I think we can discount that these were 'allies of Angela Rayner'.
She is most likely to follow on if there were to be a change, and she really does seem to be learning all sorts of lessons and making herself fit for any such change, but she's not seeking it.
Leadership change for Labour is only being urged by the left, and they are doing it without any plausible candidate of their own so that they have plenty of time for a second destabilisation.
I've been watching Glasto for an hour. It has been dire, particularly Pete Doherty. But now we have Nile Rogers. Absolutely sublime!
The production value is a million times better than what I saw before.
My eldest daughter was obsessed with Pete Doherty as a teenager. She went all around the country to watch him play live and became friends with him and Amy when she was a student in London. It was a very difficult time in her life as I am sure you can imagine. I thought he had some poetical ability but he has not aged well.
Gosh, David, that must have been a worry. "Please don't put your life in the hands of a ... etc"
O/T, and because some posters kindly expressed an interest last week, here is my weekly pic of our self-build. And, oh my, it's exciting - we now have a floor (well sub-floor). Woo-hoo!
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
I think we can discount that these were 'allies of Angela Rayner'.
She is most likely to follow on if there were to be a change, and she really does seem to be learning all sorts of lessons and making herself fit for any such change, but she's not seeking it.
Leadership change for Labour is only being urged by the left, and they are doing it without any plausible candidate of their own so that they have plenty of time for a second destabilisation.
Yes but Rayner is clearly emerging as the preferred candidate of the Labour left
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
It's not like the Mail has it's own agenda. Jenrick PM by Christmas*.
*Not quite sure how.
If you believe the Mail Jenrick will have replaced Badenoch as Tory leader and Rayner will have replaced Starmer as Labour leader and UK PM by Christmas 2026
O/T, and because some posters kindly expressed an interest last week, here is my weekly pic of our self-build. And, oh my, it's exciting - we now have a floor (well sub-floor). Woo-hoo!
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
I think we can discount that these were 'allies of Angela Rayner'.
She is most likely to follow on if there were to be a change, and she really does seem to be learning all sorts of lessons and making herself fit for any such change, but she's not seeking it.
Leadership change for Labour is only being urged by the left, and they are doing it without any plausible candidate of their own so that they have plenty of time for a second destabilisation.
Yes but Rayner is clearly emerging as the preferred candidate of the Labour left
Seems so certainly. She's not very left now though. It's a bit like Ed Balls.
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
I think we can discount that these were 'allies of Angela Rayner'.
She is most likely to follow on if there were to be a change, and she really does seem to be learning all sorts of lessons and making herself fit for any such change, but she's not seeking it.
Leadership change for Labour is only being urged by the left, and they are doing it without any plausible candidate of their own so that they have plenty of time for a second destabilisation.
Yes but Rayner is clearly emerging as the preferred candidate of the Labour left
Seems so certainly. She's not very left now though. It's a bit like Ed Balls.
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
It's not like the Mail has it's own agenda. Jenrick PM by Christmas*.
*Not quite sure how.
If you believe the Mail Jenrick will have replaced Badenoch as Tory leader and Rayner will have replaced Starmer as Labour leader and UK PM by Christmas 2026
A commendable effort by both main parties to make the prospect of Farage as PM look comparatively less ridiculous?
Thought Matthew Syed's piece in the Times today deserves wider circulation. He hits the nail on the head.
"Our only chance is for more people — pundits, politicians, informed voters — to stop pussyfooting around and call out the root cause of the crisis in democracy. It isn’t hopeless leaders or weak PMs but the denialism and entitlement of the people who put them there. The more we make this case, explain it, expound it, the higher the probability that the delusion will be exposed and the electorate will come to see what was true all along. Fairies don’t exist at the bottom of the garden, state payouts can’t keep rising faster than growth (any more than rights can keep outpacing responsibilities) and no matter how much you shut your eyes and wish it were so, two plus two will never equal five."
As I am here I should also add that Palestine is nowhere near the most pressing issue facing this country regardless of how many Islamists we elect to parliament or how many trendies parade around in their black and white scarves.
Blimey, that sounds so familiar that I had to check it wasn't me.
You do tend to be rather selective in your mission to curb government expenditure though. When the issue was raised of the £40bn a year the BOE (paid by the Treasury) pays to commercial banks in interest on their QE holdings (unlike other central banks), you declared that that was necessary to support the banking industry - or words to that effect.
No, I merely said that we needed to distinguish between real money and paper transactions. The Bank issued that debt. Banks bought it. They are entitled to their interest on it even although the bank effectively printed it.
Not paying that money would be a default. That may come but it will be disastrous when it does. We don't need to do that right now.
The £40bn you are talking about arises because the gilts bought by the Banks are worth more now than they were at the date of issue so early repayment costs, just like cancelling a fixed term mortgage. But its still created money. It is still a consequence of a very dangerous policy (QE) which we need to face up to. We need to close Pandora's box. If politicians think that playing with the boxes contents is risk free we will all pay a terrible price.
Overwrought nonsense. Even Andrew Bailey's reaction to the idea was “a pretty substantial change and not one that I would currently advocate”. Hardly the upending of the economy that you foretell.
Why exactly should commercial banks receive interest from the Bank on money they were given by the Bank in the first place? It is a completely unwarranted, frankly socialistic subsidy of the Banking industry.
The idea of stopping the payments on QE holdings was first mooted by Deputy Bank of England Governer Paul Tucker, and it is perfectly sound, and frankly ridiculous that it hasn't already happened, given Rachel Reeves' increasingly desperate rummaging down the sofa to balance the books.
I am as big an advocate of welfare spending being curtailed, the NHS getting itself under control, and the small/efficient state as anyone - but all must pay, and that includes the Banks. But not for you it would appear.
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
It's not like the Mail has it's own agenda. Jenrick PM by Christmas*.
*Not quite sure how.
If you believe the Mail Jenrick will have replaced Badenoch as Tory leader and Rayner will have replaced Starmer as Labour leader and UK PM by Christmas 2026
A commendable effort by both main parties to make the prospect of Farage as PM look comparatively less ridiculous?
Albeit Rayner and Jenrick might be more likely to win back white working class voters from Reform than Starmer and Badenoch, I suspect Sir Ed Davey would be most happy to be facing Rayner, Jenrick and Farage though
'Wounded PM gone in a year say allies of Angela Rayner'
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
I think we can discount that these were 'allies of Angela Rayner'.
She is most likely to follow on if there were to be a change, and she really does seem to be learning all sorts of lessons and making herself fit for any such change, but she's not seeking it.
Leadership change for Labour is only being urged by the left, and they are doing it without any plausible candidate of their own so that they have plenty of time for a second destabilisation.
Yes but Rayner is clearly emerging as the preferred candidate of the Labour left
Seems so certainly. She's not very left now though. It's a bit like Ed Balls.
She is left of Balls but not as left as Corbyn was
Comments
I wonder if an artist went on a racist tirade about a prominent black individual they would be saying well we did warn you there might be "discriminatory language".
I find it amazing they don't have the 7s delay technology that they use during most live tv and radio to cut exactly this stuff out.
Maybe Jones.
I thought the writer/director wrapped it up very well indeed.
The Guardian reviewer seems to have missed the point.
Strand Poly v Bloomsbury Poly.
https://x.com/skysportsnews/status/1939279334516076774?s=61
Thousands in Norway told they won up to millions in lottery error
An error in the conversion from Eurocents to Norwegian kroner caused the prize amounts to be "excessively high", the company said. The amount was multiplied by 100, instead of being divided by 100, local media reported.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15wn70v7z8o
Posters who said they were nothing to worry about? Not quite but there were plenty of posters who focused exclusively on the 'understandable' causes of it rather than the culpability of the perpetrators.
But some anti-IDF chanting at Glasto? Total outrage, end of! It's an odd contrast. This is my point. Nothing more.
Can tell some people here didn’t watch it - the flag waving would have been causing cardiac arrests.
A Guardian reviewer thought that Dune was an example of promoting “White Saviours”.
Can Iron Maiden still do it live? I saw them maybe 10 years ago and they were still good then.
China has pretty well wiped out the competition.
https://x.com/Jukanlosreve/status/1939182615208362294
.,“Direct Competition with China Difficult”… Japan’s National Semiconductor Champion’s Bitter Declaration of Failure..
Is there a 'Remember the Holocaust' bench alongside the 'Free Palestine' one??
Not to mention the song Aces High, the background video for which presented non stop Spitfire on Messerschmitt action…
We have sadly got to the state where a government can only get elected by lying to the voters. It should therefore come as no surprise that we get the governments that we do and deservedly so.
We have had various governments, from the major parties, who have claimed to be all about “tough choices”. Except for any choices that are er… tough. And are useless with it.
This is why Reform is topping the polls.
And when they fuck up, onto the next….
I’m no fan of Burnham. It just feels like the govt is rudderless at the moment. Swap Starmer for Burnham or Rayner what changes ? Nothing I can see.
It’s continuity Sunak and it shouldn’t be as Labour had nearly five years with Starmer to get govt ready.
I'm a litigator & investigator. Most of the time I tried to persuade clients not to litigate as it's rarely the best way to resolve problems. Similarly with investigations: if I had a £ for every time I told people it was best to behave in a way which avoided the need for investigations I'd be as rich as Croesus by now.
Good lawyers do try and persuade and, frankly, that's the difference between a lawyer who knows the law and has all sorts of tactical games up their sleeve and one who has good judgment. Examples of the former can be seen advising the Post Office. The latter are worth their weight in gold.
MPs job is to persuade and explain and, often, to speak unpleasant truths to the voters. Leaders who do not do this are leaders in name only and it really is not good enough to blame voters for not wanting to listen as a reason not to do this. Cowardice is not what you want in a leader.
Of course it's hard to spell out uncomfortable truths. I've been doing it most of my professional life. But eventually if you are trustworthy and honest people will listen. But you have to earn that trust and that takes hard work. Too many in our political class simply do not understand why integrity matters nor are they willing to do the hard work. So here we are. With a society where a significant part of it seems to have lost its moral compass and another part of it is too afraid to say so.
As for me, I'm fine today. But I have had a tough few weeks.
Since February I have had so many X-rays, ultrasounds, MRiS, CT scans, biopsies, ECGs, oxygen masks, blood tests, intravenous antibiotics, BP tests and temperatures taken I've lost count. I've been treated by specialists in A&E, chest, breast cancer, haematology, oncology and now I'll be seeing a gastroenterologist for a cyst on my pancreas. It's by telephone so I'm hoping this means it's not serious. Either that or it's so bad it's not even worth a hospital visit. On Friday I had a load of radiation injected so that a gamma camera could take a photo of my entire skeleton. My white blood cell count is low. My mood was even lower at the end of the day. I have a small tower of pill boxes on my bedside table: I resemble nothing so much as my hypochondriac grandparents who lived until their late 80's.
Fat chance.
I'm told to listen to my body & it is exhausted. And a bit fucking fed up frankly. I went to all the screenings, was told there was no problem despite 3 previous operations on the now cancerous breast & so being at risk, ate healthily, rarely drank, cycled for decades, avoided Covid and did not have even a bloody cold for years. So how the absolute fuck did I end up with Stage 4 fucking cancer? And now the government gives every impression of thinking that people like me are a waste of space and money, though it has been more than happy to take my higher rate tax for the last few decades.
Still, I get free parking at the hospital. So there is that.
"the names of Jewish industry executives who had signed a letter to Glastonbury concerned about Kneecap was leaked to the band, even though it was marked private. Then each of them had their names and emails released publicly. They received multiple death threats and even some faced the threat of losing their jobs."
https://x.com/nicolelampert/status/1939110439973200001?s=19
So, of course, I said go ahead and in Oct of that year he did. According to the schedule I was given afterwards things are as good as they’re going to get. I can walk, with a ‘walker’ or Zimmer frame, quite a long way. Around 500 steps on a good day. At least that’s as far as the nearest pub!
I can’t stand, or take more than a few steps, unaided.
I type with one finger; two if it’s a good day.
I can’t shower, or do or anything else in the bathroom unaided.
I’ve been told I’m unfit to drive.
But I’m keeping going.
So, Ms Cyclefree, nil desperandum. Keep, as someone said, buggering on. Once you get sorted, and it does sometimes seem forever before you do, you’ll find there are all sorts of help you can get.
Best of luck.
Always great to hear from you @Cyclefree. I very much hope things are going well.
I became fixated on the wire in my knee from an injury to the extent that I almost wanted it removed, but gradually made my peace with it.
As I tell my third years on the oncology unit despite what health professionals tell you, and the many state, only around 40% of cancers are linked to lifestyle. The rest - we don’t yet know why, although random chance in mutations, unknown reactions to viral infection, and other mechanisms will cover a lot. In the end you were just unlucky, and it sucks. But while there is life, there is hope and we all, I am certain, wish you many more years of ascerbic comment and common sense.
Live for the day and get pleasure from it.
It’s common in fisheries which aren’t fished much for fish to try anything - stories of bare hooks etc.
As fishing becomes regular, the selection pressure makes the fish harder to catch.
Anyway it's not my only fishing tale, but it's about a million percent better than my 'went to canal and caught a gudgeon one'.
The production value is a million times better than what I saw before.
Not paying that money would be a default. That may come but it will be disastrous when it does. We don't need to do that right now.
The £40bn you are talking about arises because the gilts bought by the Banks are worth more now than they were at the date of issue so early repayment costs, just like cancelling a fixed term mortgage. But its still created money. It is still a consequence of a very dangerous policy (QE) which we need to face up to. We need to close Pandora's box. If politicians think that playing with the boxes contents is risk free we will all pay a terrible price.
Interestingly this morning I was told that it was an American firm that discovered oil in the North Sea at the end of the 1960s, and much that was then in Norwegian waters had been British waters just two years earlier. The suggestion was that the change in maritime boundaries took place just before anyone knew about the oil, and hence Norway was very lucky. I don’t know anything more about this and wonder whether it’s an accurate story?
QE is/was just money printing. The BoE need to just own up to that and stop the charade. The administration of which undoubtedly costs a lot of money anyway.
But money is its own nonsense and we have to simply decide where to draw the line. On the whole, despite my reservations I'd draw the line bang on where it is now - I have 'money' at risk after all.
Is it conceivable he could be a Reform candidate next time?
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2025/06/thomas-skinners-full-english
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/o6zp6y/gdp_per_capita_in_europe_preww2/#lightbox
In 1960 it was slightly lower than the UK but higher than Italy, Austria, Belgium or France.
https://demographia.com/db-ppp60+.htm
'Allies of Angela Rayner expect Sir Keir Starmer to be ousted within 12 months – with the Deputy Prime Minister most likely to succeed him in No 10.
Last week's humiliating Government U-turn over planned £5 billion cuts to welfare has left the Prime Minister 'gravely wounded' and unlikely to lead the party into the next election, the allies said.
After rebel MPs forced Sir Keir to row back on the reforms, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been left with a further £3 billion black hole in her finances, raising the prospect of more tax rises in the autumn...
The turmoil – ahead of Sir Keir's first anniversary as Prime Minister on Saturday – comes as a poll for today's Mail on Sunday found that 61 per cent of voters think Sir Keir should quit as Prime Minister.
According to the survey by Find Out Now, only 25 per cent think Sir Keir will still be in Downing Street by the next election, with even Labour supporters split 50/50 on the question. Futhermore, a total of 64 per cent think that Ms Reeves should be fired by Sir Keir.
Ms Rayner tops the list of ministerial candidates to succeed Sir Keir among all voters – and boasts commanding support from the party and union members who would vote in a leadership contest.
The Rayner ally told The Mail on Sunday: 'I think Angela will be the leader. "
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14857273/Wounded-PM-gone-year-say-allies-Angela-Rayner.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c33514nryy1o
"The prime minister has condemned UK punk duo Bob Vylan for urging "death" to Israeli troops in what he called "appalling hate speech"."
*Not quite sure how.
She is most likely to follow on if there were to be a change, and she really does seem to be learning all sorts of lessons and making herself fit for any such change, but she's not seeking it.
Leadership change for Labour is only being urged by the left, and they are doing it without any plausible candidate of their own so that they have plenty of time for a second destabilisation.
(Here's the blog for those bored with Glasto: https://forum.buildhub.org.uk/blogs/entry/1094-week-5-block-and-beam-floor/)
Said no one.
Why exactly should commercial banks receive interest from the Bank on money they were given by the Bank in the first place? It is a completely unwarranted, frankly socialistic subsidy of the Banking industry.
The idea of stopping the payments on QE holdings was first mooted by Deputy Bank of England Governer Paul Tucker, and it is perfectly sound, and frankly ridiculous that it hasn't already happened, given Rachel Reeves' increasingly desperate rummaging down the sofa to balance the books.
https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-10/Quantitative-easing-monetary-policy-implementation-and-the-public-finances-Green-Budget-2022.pdf
I am as big an advocate of welfare spending being curtailed, the NHS getting itself under control, and the small/efficient state as anyone - but all must pay, and that includes the Banks. But not for you it would appear.
I have a list of names I'm particularly tracking. Would not (before you ask) dream of disclosing it. But let's see how many on my list survive.
(Would any ambitious politician dare do a Gilbert and Sullivan parody these days?)