It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Those protests were 40 days ago this weekend, which is the official period of mourning and why the protestors are back on the streets again this weekend. It wouldn’t be a surprise to hear of tens of thousands more deaths, the bravery of those protesting in Iran itself is off the charts.
One suspects that the American diplomatic view at the moment is that this can all be over quickly if Khemani and his ministers get on a plane to Moscow - the alternative being a couple of hundred US aircraft already in the region, locked and loaded…
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
Yes, and I am advocating we should be pushing for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime.
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
More support in Israel than the US for that though. 52% of Americans oppose bombing Iran in response to its treatment of protestors but 59% of Israelis back joining a US strike on Iran
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
"Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I'm an agent of chaos. Oh, and you know the thing about chaos? It's fair!”
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
The vast majority of the “bad” in the whole Middle East and North Africa region, is at Iran’s door. They’re behind the support and funding of most of the militant groups for a thousand miles in any direction from Tehran. They’re destabilising countries and funding wars that affect hundreds of millions of people.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
"Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I'm an agent of chaos. Oh, and you know the thing about chaos? It's fair!”
Batman is also an agent of chaos.
In D&D terms, the Joker is Chaotic Evil, Superman is Lawful Good, while Batman is Chaotic Good.
While good is better than evil, lawful is not always better than chaos. The thing that is worse in the long-term than Chaotic Evil, is Lawful Evil, which the Iranian regime is.
Or in Orwellian terms, "a boot stamping on a human face - forever".
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
Yes, and I am advocating we should be pushing for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime.
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
Well, President TACO is what we’ve got at the moment. Talk of an attack on Iran is in that context. Your ideal scenario is a bit too much of a fantasy at the moment to warrant much discussion.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
Yes, and I am advocating we should be pushing for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime.
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
Well, President TACO is what we’ve got at the moment. Talk of an attack on Iran is in that context. Your ideal scenario is a bit too much of a fantasy at the moment to warrant much discussion.
Indeed, so we have to take whatever small mercies we can.
A concerted effort is ideal.
Unconcerted attacks at least will weaken the regime and help give protestors more of a fighting chance, even if they'll still be heavily outnumbered.
Is Gorton and Denton going the same way as Stoneygate ward in Leicester did this week?
Second would be ideal. Labour don't need the seat but as far as it's possible it would be good for Reform to be roundly beaten Also a victory for Green would encourage Starmer to start looking leftwards and stop apeing the fascists
A victory for the Greens would be a disaster for Labour and risks leaking further Labour votes to Polanski's party.
Indeed a narrow Reform win with Labour a close second and the Greens third would be better for SKS than a Green win as at least he could then say 'Vote Green, get Reform'
I respectfully disagree.
The Green vote is much flakier than the Reform vote in many Labour seats
It's easier to persuade people with a degree of intelligence to vote tactically, less so with your average Reform bone head
If the Greens start winning Labour seats Labour have zero chance of getting Green voters to vote tactically Labour to beat Reform, Reform voters won't be voting Labour either way
I doubt that, going in to the next GE I doubt anyone thinks the Greens will win a majority so lots of their sympathisers will slide back to Labour except in a handful of seats where the Green are very strong.
The Tories on the other hand are going to have a hell of a job convincing voters that Reform have no chance if they have been leading the polls for most of this parliament.
Labour will almost certainly go in to the next GE as the strongest party on the left and therefore find it easier to mop up tactical votes from Greens, Lib Dems and Nats in seats where they are clearly the main challengers to Reform or the Tories. Unless Reform declines rapidly the right is going to be badly split going into the next GE and that could hand Labour a comfortable majority on 30-35% of the vote
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
"Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I'm an agent of chaos. Oh, and you know the thing about chaos? It's fair!”
Batman is also an agent of chaos.
In D&D terms, the Joker is Chaotic Evil, Superman is Lawful Good, while Batman is Chaotic Good.
While good is better than evil, lawful is not always better than chaos. The thing that is worse in the long-term than Chaotic Evil, is Lawful Evil, which the Iranian regime is.
Or in Orwellian terms, "a boot stamping on a human face - forever".
I think it varies. One can make the argument that the State is inherently evil, which is the view not just of anarchists, but of Hobbes. But, Hobbes saw the State as a necessary evil, and a lesser evil than being in a state of nature.
I think chaotic evil is preferable to a State like Nazi Germany, 18th century Haiti, or Democratic Kampuchea.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
"Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I'm an agent of chaos. Oh, and you know the thing about chaos? It's fair!”
Batman is also an agent of chaos.
In D&D terms, the Joker is Chaotic Evil, Superman is Lawful Good, while Batman is Chaotic Good.
While good is better than evil, lawful is not always better than chaos. The thing that is worse in the long-term than Chaotic Evil, is Lawful Evil, which the Iranian regime is.
Or in Orwellian terms, "a boot stamping on a human face - forever".
I think it varies. One can make the argument that the State is inherently evil, which is the view not just of anarchists, but of Hobbes. But, Hobbes saw the State as a necessary evil, and a lesser evil than being in a state of nature.
I think chaotic evil is preferable to a State like Nazi Germany, 18th century Haiti, or Democratic Kampuchea.
Absolutely agreed, that was my point.
People make out like chaos is a bad thing, but regimented "lawful" evil is far worse.
Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Putin's Russia, North Korea, modern Iran etc - or the Empire in Star Wars etc - authoritarian evil dictatorships are worse than chaos and worse than anarchy.
Is Gorton and Denton going the same way as Stoneygate ward in Leicester did this week?
Second would be ideal. Labour don't need the seat but as far as it's possible it would be good for Reform to be roundly beaten Also a victory for Green would encourage Starmer to start looking leftwards and stop apeing the fascists
A victory for the Greens would be a disaster for Labour and risks leaking further Labour votes to Polanski's party.
Indeed a narrow Reform win with Labour a close second and the Greens third would be better for SKS than a Green win as at least he could then say 'Vote Green, get Reform'
I respectfully disagree.
The Green vote is much flakier than the Reform vote in many Labour seats
It's easier to persuade people with a degree of intelligence to vote tactically, less so with your average Reform bone head
If the Greens start winning Labour seats Labour have zero chance of getting Green voters to vote tactically Labour to beat Reform, Reform voters won't be voting Labour either way
I doubt that, going in to the next GE I doubt anyone thinks the Greens will win a majority so lots of their sympathisers will slide back to Labour except in a handful of seats where the Green are very strong.
The Tories on the other hand are going to have a hell of a job convincing voters that Reform have no chance if they have been leading the polls for most of this parliament.
Labour will almost certainly go in to the next GE as the strongest party on the left and therefore find it easier to mop up tactical votes from Greens, Lib Dems and Nats in seats where they are clearly the main challengers to Reform or the Tories. Unless Reform declines rapidly the right is going to be badly split going into the next GE and that could hand Labour a comfortable majority on 30-35% of the vote
Spot on I believe.
Other than in areas of real strength some v labour, some v LD Green vote will mean a possible Reform or Tory MP and the average Green voter will have the intellect to understand that.
At least we should be grateful he's not a Russian.
Big breaking story. Odd wet Tory with a liking for the Chagos surrender deal with its 12 ROUNDS OF NEGOTIATIONS and a hatred of Kemi Badenoch combined with a frankly perverted desire to install James Cleverley (sic) as Tory leader decides to reinvent themself as a Labour troll (who possesses all the same views) to continue the PB campaign.
I actually understand your thinking because as soon as posted my research about 11 rounds of constructive Conservative Mauritius negotiations over 2 years, I too noticed Brix was often repeating it. I believe it’s true and Kemi front bench being dishonest as shit scared what Farage will do to them, I think it’s absolute impossible for Labour to have negotiated it in just 8 weeks. You should really agree with me on that, as you are an intelligent thinker. But no, I barely have time for one PB avatar let alone add zillions of Brix posts everyday too, and more than one on a forum at once doesn’t in spirit of game either. i am right in the middle of a very busy weekend, my mum and dad have gone on holiday!
Nor I’m not the one of the ones pushing Cleverley as the change needed as I’m not convinced he is one nation and will get rid of these rubbish policies that’s just photocopied Farage policies
Only Jeremy Hunt can save the Tories at the next General Election.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
The extra time issue is because, IMHO, the exam system is badly designed at the minute meaning that a great many students can't finish in time, so getting extra time means they can get extra marks, so playing the system to gain extra time is the right thing to do.
My daughter took her SATs last year at the end of primary school and did not finish it in time, but was also advised they're not expected to finish it in time. If we'd played the system to get her extra time, she could have got extra marks, so did we do the wrong thing in not doing that?
When I sat my International Baccalaureate I only sat it with other bright kids so I don't know if it was the norm or not (only 12 kids in my school took the IB and all ex top-set kids) but we all finished our exams with plenty of time to spare and left our exams early. I don't know if that was the norm, or just us, but there should be enough time in regular time to finish the exam and go through and double-check your work and then think "there's nothing else I can do now", rather than be seeking to extract every extra minute you can to eek out extra marks.
Exams IMHO should be about what you know, in a careful and considered way, not a sprint against a clock.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
I have walked to pub for lunch and I’ve got a moment to comment on the header. What’s important with this I think I am 100% confident Starmer has NOT said no to Donald Trump about using Uk bases to bomb Iran. Starmer not sure of attempt at regime change, but if it’s just bombing Iran nuclear programme Starmer definitely says YES imo.
At least we should be grateful he's not a Russian.
Big breaking story. Odd wet Tory with a liking for the Chagos surrender deal with its 12 ROUNDS OF NEGOTIATIONS and a hatred of Kemi Badenoch combined with a frankly perverted desire to install James Cleverley (sic) as Tory leader decides to reinvent themself as a Labour troll (who possesses all the same views) to continue the PB campaign.
I actually understand your thinking because as soon as posted my research about 11 rounds of constructive Conservative Mauritius negotiations over 2 years, I too noticed Brix was often repeating it. I believe it’s true and Kemi front bench being dishonest as shit scared what Farage will do to them, I think it’s absolute impossible for Labour to have negotiated it in just 8 weeks. You should really agree with me on that, as you are an intelligent thinker. But no, I barely have time for one PB avatar let alone add zillions of Brix posts everyday too, and more than one on a forum at once doesn’t in spirit of game either. i am right in the middle of a very busy weekend, my mum and dad have gone on holiday!
Nor I’m not the one of the ones pushing Cleverley as the change needed as I’m not convinced he is one nation and will get rid of these rubbish policies that’s just photocopied Farage policies
Only Jeremy Hunt can save the Tories at the next General Election.
In which case, the Conservatives are in trouble.
There's not much sign Hunt wants the job, and there's even less sign that the job wants Hunt.
As for Cleverley, he's only really the answer in the Michael Howard sense- self-aware enough to know that his job is to keep the lights on while someone better emerges. Flip knows who that is.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
The extra time issue is because, IMHO, the exam system is badly designed at the minute meaning that a great many students can't finish in time, so getting extra time means they can get extra marks, so playing the system to gain extra time is the right thing to do.
My daughter took her SATs last year at the end of primary school and did not finish it in time, but was also advised they're not expected to finish it in time. If we'd played the system to get her extra time, she could have got extra marks, so did we do the wrong thing in not doing that?
When I sat my International Baccalaureate I only sat it with other bright kids so I don't know if it was the norm or not (only 12 kids in my school took the IB and all ex top-set kids) but we all finished our exams with plenty of time to spare and left our exams early. I don't know if that was the norm, or just us, but there should be enough time in regular time to finish the exam and go through and double-check your work and then think "there's nothing else I can do now", rather than be seeking to extract every extra minute you can to eek out extra marks.
Exams IMHO should be about what you know, in a careful and considered way, not a sprint against a clock.
The last is definitely true, and one major problem with our exam system is that in the last 10 years exams have become too long and too difficult in the bizarre belief that if you make exams harder you make candidates cleverer. No. You don't do anything by making exams harder except make it more difficult to identify who can do what. Exams that are too hard and long are just as little use as exams that are too short and easy. You have to pitch them just right, and at this moment we're absolutely not getting that right. That in itself is one major cause of anxiety.
In answer to you point about extra time, yes that is true but it's actually incredibly hard in my experience to get extra time and anyone just 'gaming the system' won't manage it - there are simply too many hoops to jump through and everything has to be either perfect or Bleeding Obvious (as in, preventing somebody from eating the pencil by mistake) to progress. EHCPs are a bit different because there access arrangements are managed by the school. But they're a bugger to get. It's much more normal in my experience to see children who should have one but doesn't get it than one who shouldn't get it but has one.
If, however, this is devolved onto schools who don't have the resources to fight court cases and are in direct personal contact with the people asking - and who, moreover, have a vested interest in getting the best results possible - does anyone who is not as stupid as Susan Acland-Hood, a woman who let us not forgotten has admitted drinking alcohol at work, really think that will cause a reduction in assessed need or access arrangements?
I have walked to pub for lunch and I’ve got a moment to comment on the header. What’s important with this I think I am 100% confident Starmer has NOT said no to Donald Trump about using Uk bases to bomb Iran. Starmer not sure of attempt at regime change, but if it’s just bombing Iran nuclear programme Starmer definitely says YES imo.
US also asked for our help with intelligence, and I’m also sure there will be other support stuff UK will be all in on too. With Cooper and Lammy both stateside there’s obvious lots of top level talking going on on fine detail of joint mission statement.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
Yes, and I am advocating we should be pushing for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime.
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
Well, President TACO is what we’ve got at the moment. Talk of an attack on Iran is in that context. Your ideal scenario is a bit too much of a fantasy at the moment to warrant much discussion.
Indeed, so we have to take whatever small mercies we can.
A concerted effort is ideal.
Unconcerted attacks at least will weaken the regime and help give protestors more of a fighting chance, even if they'll still be heavily outnumbered.
Taking no action is the worst of all outcomes.
Better any action than no action.
That logic is flawed. A limited action may provide no help to protestors, kill civilians, cost the US money and maybe lives, and even strengthen support for the Iranian regime in some quarters. Hatred of the US and Israel has always been used as a rallying cry by Iranian hardliners. Some previous attacks did seem to increase their hold because there was a rally around the flag effect.
The Iranian regime’s claim has always been that the protestors are agitators put up to it by their foreign enemies. Bombings clearly play into that narrative.
Maybe some attacks now can do more good than harm, but to achieve that will need more than your gung-ho optimism for chaos. It will need careful military planning and coordination. Are we going to get that from Trump or Bibi? Trump will sell the protestors down the river for $100 million in his private bank account from the Iranian government.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
That's an excellent question. Those thinking it's all just malingering are wrong, I think.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
The fun bit will be when the mullahs try and join their kids, here the UK.
Yes kids, they are very hypocritical - lots of Iranian regime brats getting drunk in the fashionable cocktail bars and shopping the hell out of Burlington Arcade.
Anyway, I’m waiting for the impassioned pleas for asylum for “noble religious scholars”
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
Yes, and I am advocating we should be pushing for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime.
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
Well, President TACO is what we’ve got at the moment. Talk of an attack on Iran is in that context. Your ideal scenario is a bit too much of a fantasy at the moment to warrant much discussion.
Indeed, so we have to take whatever small mercies we can.
A concerted effort is ideal.
Unconcerted attacks at least will weaken the regime and help give protestors more of a fighting chance, even if they'll still be heavily outnumbered.
Taking no action is the worst of all outcomes.
Better any action than no action.
Well, there's a couple of ways I might dispute that.
Firstly you could apply the medical principle of, "first do no harm." I think that would be a pretty good basis for foreign policy. Worth remembering that it was British and US meddling in Iran, supporting the Shah against a democratic politician, that paved the way for the current Iranian regime.
So doing nothing, in the absence of a course of action that has a well-founded hope for success, is often the right action.
Secondly, politics is almost always about choices. You choose to do one thing and you are choosing not to do another. There are many places in the world where diplomatic and military effort would be more beneficial than a campaign of airstrikes against Iran.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
The fun bit will be when the mullahs try and join their kids, here the UK.
Yes kids, they are very hypocritical - lots of Iranian regime brats getting drunk in the fashionable cocktail bars and shopping the hell out of Burlington Arcade.
Anyway, I’m waiting for the impassioned pleas for asylum for “noble religious scholars”
I'd offer them asylum but one of classmates burned down Coney Hill Lunatic Asylum* back in 1999, so I can't.
*For the avoidance of doubt neither he nor I were inmates at the time.
Has there ever been a regime change instigated by the West on a non-Western country that the natives looked at with fondness when all was done and dusted?
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
It’s hard not to recall that a lot of people in Iran in 1979 thought that whatever came after the Shah would have to be better.
I have walked to pub for lunch and I’ve got a moment to comment on the header. What’s important with this I think I am 100% confident Starmer has NOT said no to Donald Trump about using Uk bases to bomb Iran. Starmer not sure of attempt at regime change, but if it’s just bombing Iran nuclear programme Starmer definitely says YES imo.
US also asked for our help with intelligence
Trump, Vance, Hegseth, Gabbard, all could definitely do with getting some intelligence.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
SEND cannot get any worse.
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
I have walked to pub for lunch and I’ve got a moment to comment on the header. What’s important with this I think I am 100% confident Starmer has NOT said no to Donald Trump about using Uk bases to bomb Iran. Starmer not sure of attempt at regime change, but if it’s just bombing Iran nuclear programme Starmer definitely says YES imo.
US also asked for our help with intelligence
Trump, Vance, Hegseth, Gabbard, all could definitely do with getting some intelligence.
Sadly they're unlikely to get any from the UK Government.
At least we should be grateful he's not a Russian.
Big breaking story. Odd wet Tory with a liking for the Chagos surrender deal with its 12 ROUNDS OF NEGOTIATIONS and a hatred of Kemi Badenoch combined with a frankly perverted desire to install James Cleverley (sic) as Tory leader decides to reinvent themself as a Labour troll (who possesses all the same views) to continue the PB campaign.
I actually understand your thinking because as soon as posted my research about 11 rounds of constructive Conservative Mauritius negotiations over 2 years, I too noticed Brix was often repeating it. I believe it’s true and Kemi front bench being dishonest as shit scared what Farage will do to them, I think it’s absolute impossible for Labour to have negotiated it in just 8 weeks. You should really agree with me on that, as you are an intelligent thinker. But no, I barely have time for one PB avatar let alone add zillions of Brix posts everyday too, and more than one on a forum at once doesn’t in spirit of game either. i am right in the middle of a very busy weekend, my mum and dad have gone on holiday!
Nor I’m not the one of the ones pushing Cleverley as the change needed as I’m not convinced he is one nation and will get rid of these rubbish policies that’s just photocopied Farage policies
Only Jeremy Hunt can save the Tories at the next General Election.
Has there ever been a regime change instigated by the West on a non-Western country that the natives looked at with fondness when all was done and dusted?
Kosovo? It wasn’t really a regime change in Kosovo or in Serbia, but it did cement the Kosovans’ control over Kosovo and produce a significant policy shift in Belgrade.
British action in Sierra Leone was generally welcomed.
The Western toppling of Japanese puppet government across south east Asia during WWII was generally supported by local populations.
Has there ever been a regime change instigated by the West on a non-Western country that the natives looked at with fondness when all was done and dusted?
Is Gorton and Denton going the same way as Stoneygate ward in Leicester did this week?
Second would be ideal. Labour don't need the seat but as far as it's possible it would be good for Reform to be roundly beaten Also a victory for Green would encourage Starmer to start looking leftwards and stop apeing the fascists
A victory for the Greens would be a disaster for Labour and risks leaking further Labour votes to Polanski's party.
Indeed a narrow Reform win with Labour a close second and the Greens third would be better for SKS than a Green win as at least he could then say 'Vote Green, get Reform'
I respectfully disagree.
The Green vote is much flakier than the Reform vote in many Labour seats
It's easier to persuade people with a degree of intelligence to vote tactically, less so with your average Reform bone head
If the Greens start winning Labour seats Labour have zero chance of getting Green voters to vote tactically Labour to beat Reform, Reform voters won't be voting Labour either way
I doubt that, going in to the next GE I doubt anyone thinks the Greens will win a majority so lots of their sympathisers will slide back to Labour except in a handful of seats where the Green are very strong.
The Tories on the other hand are going to have a hell of a job convincing voters that Reform have no chance if they have been leading the polls for most of this parliament.
Labour will almost certainly go in to the next GE as the strongest party on the left and therefore find it easier to mop up tactical votes from Greens, Lib Dems and Nats in seats where they are clearly the main challengers to Reform or the Tories. Unless Reform declines rapidly the right is going to be badly split going into the next GE and that could hand Labour a comfortable majority on 30-35% of the vote
If the Greens win seats like Gorton and Denton Labour are forecast to hold with Nowcast even with only 85 Labour MPs projected remaining where will Labour be able to say only they can beat Reform?
Tories on the other hand in seats where there is a Tory MP can much more easily say to Labour, LD and even Green voters only they can beat Reform in Tory held seats https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
SEND cannot get any worse.
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
That’s some @SeanT grade social darwinist “genetics” there.
You need to read some actual science in hurry before you start banging on about “ballast existences”
Is Gorton and Denton going the same way as Stoneygate ward in Leicester did this week?
Second would be ideal. Labour don't need the seat but as far as it's possible it would be good for Reform to be roundly beaten Also a victory for Green would encourage Starmer to start looking leftwards and stop apeing the fascists
A victory for the Greens would be a disaster for Labour and risks leaking further Labour votes to Polanski's party.
Indeed a narrow Reform win with Labour a close second and the Greens third would be better for SKS than a Green win as at least he could then say 'Vote Green, get Reform'
I respectfully disagree.
The Green vote is much flakier than the Reform vote in many Labour seats
It's easier to persuade people with a degree of intelligence to vote tactically, less so with your average Reform bone head
If the Greens start winning Labour seats Labour have zero chance of getting Green voters to vote tactically Labour to beat Reform, Reform voters won't be voting Labour either way
I doubt that, going in to the next GE I doubt anyone thinks the Greens will win a majority so lots of their sympathisers will slide back to Labour except in a handful of seats where the Green are very strong.
The Tories on the other hand are going to have a hell of a job convincing voters that Reform have no chance if they have been leading the polls for most of this parliament.
Labour will almost certainly go in to the next GE as the strongest party on the left and therefore find it easier to mop up tactical votes from Greens, Lib Dems and Nats in seats where they are clearly the main challengers to Reform or the Tories. Unless Reform declines rapidly the right is going to be badly split going into the next GE and that could hand Labour a comfortable majority on 30-35% of the vote
If the Greens win seats like Gorton and Denton Labour are forecast to hold with Nowcast even with only 85 Labour MPs projected remaining where will Labour be able to say only they can beat Reform?
Tories on the other hand in seats where there is a Tory MP can much more easily say to Labour, LD and even Green voters only they can beat Reform in Tory held seats https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
By-elections often produce huge swings that are never remotely replicated in general elections, as LibDems know well. I don’t think a loss to the Greens will be as a catastrophic as you think.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
The fun bit will be when the mullahs try and join their kids, here the UK.
Yes kids, they are very hypocritical - lots of Iranian regime brats getting drunk in the fashionable cocktail bars and shopping the hell out of Burlington Arcade.
Anyway, I’m waiting for the impassioned pleas for asylum for “noble religious scholars”
That's one reason in favour of things like sanctions on individual members/supporters of the regime, and investigations into human rights abuses. It gives you evidence to be able to say that such people should not be offered asylum, but either returned to Iran, or prosecuted here.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
The fun bit will be when the mullahs try and join their kids, here the UK.
Yes kids, they are very hypocritical - lots of Iranian regime brats getting drunk in the fashionable cocktail bars and shopping the hell out of Burlington Arcade.
Anyway, I’m waiting for the impassioned pleas for asylum for “noble religious scholars”
That's one reason in favour of things like sanctions on individual members/supporters of the regime, and investigations into human rights abuses. It gives you evidence to be able to say that such people should not be offered asylum, but either returned to Iran, or prosecuted here.
Don't worry - that stuff will be quoted in the court cases. While they are here.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
It’s hard not to recall that a lot of people in Iran in 1979 thought that whatever came after the Shah would have to be better.
Yes, but can we say that the last 47 years of Iranian history was inevitable?
I grew up with that island visible from from our house. If I didn't have an engineering business to run in Derbyshire, I think I would find buying it and moving there very hard to resist. It's a stunningly beautiful place, and as noted you're unlikely to fall out with the neighbours.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
Could not agree more. There doesn't seem to be a smidgeon of interest anywhere beyond SEND advocates to explore or consider this aspect.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
It’s hard not to recall that a lot of people in Iran in 1979 thought that whatever came after the Shah would have to be better.
Yes, but can we say that the last 47 years of Iranian history was inevitable?
Some say that recent history is about inoculating the near future.
So the bast 47 years has really, really turned young people in Iran off the idea of The Religious State.
They will, of course, find a different disaster to back. Such is history.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
1)SEND cannot get any worse.
2) We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
3) What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
4) At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
5) What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
6) They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
7) We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
8) Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
1) That's impressively naive. Are you seriously suggesting are politicians and civil servants are of a sufficient quality and humility to know the limits of their knowledge and not make things worse through ignorance and hubris? That runs flat counter to all evidence.
2) We don't, so I'm not sure what your point is. All SEND plans are reviewed annually anyway. I spend a great deal of time and get paid a fair sum of money for doing it at this very time of year (I actually have six in my inbox right now).
3) Maybe we'll finally ask the right questions?
4) Legally, it already does have the statutory duty, and has done since 1908, as amended by the notorious softy and bleeding heart liberal Margaret Thatcher in the Children's Act 1989.
5) It is slightly disturbing, especially in light of some of your earlier comments this morning, that I have to tell you Goebbels asked that same question in almost those exact same phrases in 1935. I think I don't need to tell you what it led to.
6) I hate to break it to you but having made an actual study of exam papers over the last 140 years as part of my degree, modern A-levels and GCSEs are considerably harder than their earlier equivalents and - here is another point you have forgotten - until 1986 there was no expectation that all children would sit them. Until that time most people who had what we would now identify as SEND would sit CSEs, which were a very different kettle of fish and before 1947 it was extremely common to leave school at 14 with no exam results at all.
7) To quote Jeremy Bentham, that is nonsense on stilts. One reason for the problems with the current exam system is that too many people who got where they are by passing difficult exams, including, for example, the entrance assessments for the Civil Service (which I also coach people for) which measure the ability to pass exams and not their understanding of any particular topic.
8) As I have repeatedly pointed out, if the reforms are as described they would almost certainly have precisely the opposite effect. We will see if they are. Most likely, the real issue is the one you have demonstrated with quite alarming clarity - a total of lack of understanding of the problems and the causes.
Has there ever been a regime change instigated by the West on a non-Western country that the natives looked at with fondness when all was done and dusted?
Kosovo? It wasn’t really a regime change in Kosovo or in Serbia, but it did cement the Kosovans’ control over Kosovo and produce a significant policy shift in Belgrade.
British action in Sierra Leone was generally welcomed.
The Western toppling of Japanese puppet government across south east Asia during WWII was generally supported by local populations.
Sierra Leone was in support of the exiting regime against rebels, so somewhat different.
I think the examples are few and far between in recent years. Outside the world wars I struggle to find meaningful examples that weren’t internally driven.
Now, there is an obvious internal momentum in Iran towards revolution. Whether external action strengthens or weakens that is hard to tell, but I imagine the anti regime protestors probably on balance would like the US to act against the Iranian military.
It’s honestly a moral dilemma of the highest order. Easier if you’re either a committed non-interventionist (“none of our business”) or directly threatened by Iran, like Israel.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
Could not agree more. There doesn't seem to be a smidgeon of interest anywhere beyond SEND advocates to explore or consider this aspect.
And unfortunately there are none in positions of power.
One person who did ask the right questions was Blunkett, for I think the very obvious reason, although the quality of his answers was uneven. Since then, nothing.
Has there ever been a regime change instigated by the West on a non-Western country that the natives looked at with fondness when all was done and dusted?
Yes.
Kurds and Shias certainly welcomed the end of Saddam in Iraq as did opponents of Gaddafi in Libya
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
1)SEND cannot get any worse.
2) We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
3) What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
4) At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
5) What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
6) They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
7) We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
8) Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
1) That's impressively naive
2) We don't, so I'm not sure what your point is. All SEND plans are reviewed annually anyway. I spend a great deal of time and get paid a fair sum of money for doing it at this very time of year (I actually have six in my inbox right now).
3) Maybe we'll finally ask the right questions?
4) Legally, it already does have the statutory duty, and has done since 1908, as amended by the notorious softy and bleeding heart liberal Maragaret Thatcher in the Children's Act 1989.
5) It is slightly disturbing, especially in light of some of your earlier comments this morning, that I have to tell you Goebbels asked that same question in almost those exact same phrases in 1935. I think I don't need to tell you what it led to.
6) I hate to break it to you but having made an actual study of exam papers over the last 140 years as part of my degree, modern A-levels and GCSEs are considerably harder than their earlier equivalents and - here is another point you have forgotten - until 1986 there was no expectation that all children would sit them. Until that time most people who had what we would now identify as SEND would sit CSEs, which were a very different kettle of fish and before 1947 it was extremely common to leave school at 14 with no exam results at all.
7) To quote Jeremy Bentham, that is nonsense on stilts. One reason for the problems with the current exam system is that too many people who got where they are by passing difficult exams, including, for example, the entrance assessments for the Civil Service (which I also coach people for) which measure the ability to pass exams and not their understanding of any particular topic.
8) As I have repeatedly pointed out, if the reforms are as described they would almost certainly have precisely the opposite effect. We will see if they are. Most likely, the real issue is the one you have demonstrated with quite alarming clarity - a total of lack of understanding of the problems and the causes.
Please stop posting knowledge, This is politicalSaloonBarRant.com.
On 5) - has anyone measure the number of grams of essential fats consumed by the ballast existences referred to?
on 8) "Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect" - The belt???
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
It’s hard not to recall that a lot of people in Iran in 1979 thought that whatever came after the Shah would have to be better.
Yes, but can we say that the last 47 years of Iranian history was inevitable?
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
Could not agree more. There doesn't seem to be a smidgeon of interest anywhere beyond SEND advocates to explore or consider this aspect.
And unfortunately there are none in positions of power.
One person who did ask the right questions was Blunkett, for I think the very obvious reason, although the quality of his answers was uneven. Since then, nothing.
Given it was Blunkett, was the question "Where is my machine gun?"
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
Tehran is currently experiencing shortages of drinking water, so chaos could quite easily become worse than authoritarianism in very short order if government completely breaks down.
I don't understand your logic, they're experiencing shortages under the 'order' of the Ayatollahs.
Iran's government completely breaking down would be an improvement, even if conditions worsen at least then the government won't be massacring those who protest or seek to make things better.
Things could certainly get worse if the Iranian regime was destroyed. They might even be worse for a very long time.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
It’s hard not to recall that a lot of people in Iran in 1979 thought that whatever came after the Shah would have to be better.
Yes, but can we say that the last 47 years of Iranian history was inevitable?
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
Could not agree more. There doesn't seem to be a smidgeon of interest anywhere beyond SEND advocates to explore or consider this aspect.
And unfortunately there are none in positions of power.
One person who did ask the right questions was Blunkett, for I think the very obvious reason, although the quality of his answers was uneven. Since then, nothing.
Given it was Blunkett, was the question "Where is my machine gun?"
He asked that about Chris Woodhead, apparently.
I'll forgive him a lot for having seen through that utter Tristram.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
1)SEND cannot get any worse.
2) We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
3) What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
4) At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
5) What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
6) They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
7) We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
8) Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
1) That's impressively naive
2) We don't, so I'm not sure what your point is. All SEND plans are reviewed annually anyway. I spend a great deal of time and get paid a fair sum of money for doing it at this very time of year (I actually have six in my inbox right now).
3) Maybe we'll finally ask the right questions?
4) Legally, it already does have the statutory duty, and has done since 1908, as amended by the notorious softy and bleeding heart liberal Maragaret Thatcher in the Children's Act 1989.
5) It is slightly disturbing, especially in light of some of your earlier comments this morning, that I have to tell you Goebbels asked that same question in almost those exact same phrases in 1935. I think I don't need to tell you what it led to.
6) I hate to break it to you but having made an actual study of exam papers over the last 140 years as part of my degree, modern A-levels and GCSEs are considerably harder than their earlier equivalents and - here is another point you have forgotten - until 1986 there was no expectation that all children would sit them. Until that time most people who had what we would now identify as SEND would sit CSEs, which were a very different kettle of fish and before 1947 it was extremely common to leave school at 14 with no exam results at all.
7) To quote Jeremy Bentham, that is nonsense on stilts. One reason for the problems with the current exam system is that too many people who got where they are by passing difficult exams, including, for example, the entrance assessments for the Civil Service (which I also coach people for) which measure the ability to pass exams and not their understanding of any particular topic.
8) As I have repeatedly pointed out, if the reforms are as described they would almost certainly have precisely the opposite effect. We will see if they are. Most likely, the real issue is the one you have demonstrated with quite alarming clarity - a total of lack of understanding of the problems and the causes.
Please stop posting knowledge, This is politicalSaloonBarRant.com.
On 5) - has anyone measure the number of grams of essential fats consumed by the ballast existences referred to?
on 8) "Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect" - The belt???
Perhpas they would buckle at the first sign of pressure.
It's hard not to be amazed by student protesters returning to the streets in Iran given what has happened.
I don't think the UK public will back any Trump led military action. Though we also have to bear in mind Iraq, Libya etc.
It's always what replaced the incumbent in that neck of the woods.
There are better options.
There are infinitely worse.
One thing is for sure, any sign if interfering in regime change generally results in a worse outcome
Hard to get much worse than the Ayatollahs.
I think ISIS would probably be worse. The current regime is evil, but functions somewhat as a state. ISIS is just an abbatoir.
Ceasing to operate as a state would be an improvement. At least then people locally could fight for their freedom.
Chaos is better than authoritarianism.
I think that's a bit naive. The regime still has millions of ideological supporters, and many thousands in the armed militia.
A decapitation bombing campaign wouldn't even guarantee chaos. (And given the huge death toll in Iraq from their post invasion chaos, you're also being utterly blasé about what that might mean.)
If the administration has a plan beyond drop lots of bombs, it has been kept remarkably secret. And whatever it might be, it doesn't involve US ground troops.
The Iranian regime has been less authoritarian than some of their recent neighbours (Syria or Iraq under Baathists, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Turkmenistan today). They have more consciously sought a degree of popular support, although their support is greater in rural areas, among ethnic Persians and among Shia Muslims and less in urban areas, the less Persian west or east, and among Iran’s religious minorities.
Reportedly the militias killed forty thousand people in the space of a couple of days during the first protests. A quite extraordinary number. That gives some idea of their numbers, and brutality.
Thats why there's a lot of doubt about bombing overthrowing the regime. It's possible, but it's very far from certain.
Its also why taking action is absolutely the right thing to do, in the face of such utter evil.
That’s an argument for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump (and Bibi) are going to bomb some random bits of Iran to put on a show for their domestic audiences, which will very probably have no effect on who runs Iran, but will cause civilian casualties.
Yes, and I am advocating we should be pushing for concerted military action to overthrow the Iranian regime.
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
Well, President TACO is what we’ve got at the moment. Talk of an attack on Iran is in that context. Your ideal scenario is a bit too much of a fantasy at the moment to warrant much discussion.
Indeed, so we have to take whatever small mercies we can.
A concerted effort is ideal.
Unconcerted attacks at least will weaken the regime and help give protestors more of a fighting chance, even if they'll still be heavily outnumbered.
Taking no action is the worst of all outcomes.
Better any action than no action.
That logic is flawed. A limited action may provide no help to protestors, kill civilians, cost the US money and maybe lives, and even strengthen support for the Iranian regime in some quarters. Hatred of the US and Israel has always been used as a rallying cry by Iranian hardliners. Some previous attacks did seem to increase their hold because there was a rally around the flag effect.
The Iranian regime’s claim has always been that the protestors are agitators put up to it by their foreign enemies. Bombings clearly play into that narrative.
Maybe some attacks now can do more good than harm, but to achieve that will need more than your gung-ho optimism for chaos. It will need careful military planning and coordination. Are we going to get that from Trump or Bibi? Trump will sell the protestors down the river for $100 million in his private bank account from the Iranian government.
Your logic is flawed, because yes I agree that Trump would sell the protestors down the river, but that's a reason to oppose Trump and inaction by Trump.
It is not a reason to object to action against the regime, it is a reason to push for that action to be firmer and more unremitting and to put pressure on Trump not to sell out the protestors, instead of giving him every excuse to do so.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
1)SEND cannot get any worse.
2) We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
3) What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
4) At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
5) What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
6) They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
7) We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
8) Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
1) That's impressively naive
2) We don't, so I'm not sure what your point is. All SEND plans are reviewed annually anyway. I spend a great deal of time and get paid a fair sum of money for doing it at this very time of year (I actually have six in my inbox right now).
3) Maybe we'll finally ask the right questions?
4) Legally, it already does have the statutory duty, and has done since 1908, as amended by the notorious softy and bleeding heart liberal Maragaret Thatcher in the Children's Act 1989.
5) It is slightly disturbing, especially in light of some of your earlier comments this morning, that I have to tell you Goebbels asked that same question in almost those exact same phrases in 1935. I think I don't need to tell you what it led to.
6) I hate to break it to you but having made an actual study of exam papers over the last 140 years as part of my degree, modern A-levels and GCSEs are considerably harder than their earlier equivalents and - here is another point you have forgotten - until 1986 there was no expectation that all children would sit them. Until that time most people who had what we would now identify as SEND would sit CSEs, which were a very different kettle of fish and before 1947 it was extremely common to leave school at 14 with no exam results at all.
7) To quote Jeremy Bentham, that is nonsense on stilts. One reason for the problems with the current exam system is that too many people who got where they are by passing difficult exams, including, for example, the entrance assessments for the Civil Service (which I also coach people for) which measure the ability to pass exams and not their understanding of any particular topic.
8) As I have repeatedly pointed out, if the reforms are as described they would almost certainly have precisely the opposite effect. We will see if they are. Most likely, the real issue is the one you have demonstrated with quite alarming clarity - a total of lack of understanding of the problems and the causes.
Please stop posting knowledge, This is politicalSaloonBarRant.com.
On 5) - has anyone measure the number of grams of essential fats consumed by the ballast existences referred to?
on 8) "Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect" - The belt???
Brings to mind the standup routine about childhood holidays with the boy cowering and shouting “no Dad, please, I’m sorry” when his father removed his belt at security.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
A historical argument I've been exposed to recently is that ultimately all revolutions are about money, so it's not really that surprising that people would prioritise a low tax rate over other considerations.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
The important bit you are missing, is that the laws aren't applied to *them*.
Generally, such states are quite smart about image. At the Rich Entitled Furinner level, you get kicked out for most law breaches. Jail is reserved for those who fuck up in ways the local rulers find especially annoying or embarrassing.
So it's largely consequence free - go work for a bank (or whatever) there, for 10 years. Make a pile. Unless you do something stupid like start a joint venture with a High Level local and lose all his money, you will be fine.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
SEND cannot get any worse.
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
Something needs to be done about the burgeoning cost. It won’t be. We already have the well funded lobbyists complaining and getting their views over on the local news.
We had an absurd situation where Newcastle council, due to costs, were going to cease send provision for a group where they had no statutory requirement to provide it.
After a well organised campaign, the council folded.
The language used is very explicit too.
I’m afraid these changes won’t happen.
In Newcastle this demand has increase by 170% since 2015.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
SEND cannot get any worse.
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
Something needs to be done about the burgeoning cost. It won’t be. We already have the well funded lobbyists complaining and getting their views over on the local news.
We had an absurd situation where Newcastle council, due to costs, were going to cease send provision for a group where they had no statutory requirement to provide it.
After a well organised campaign, the council folded.
The language used is very explicit too.
I’m afraid these changes won’t happen.
In Newcastle this demand has increase by 170% since 2015.
I can say, without exaggeration, that I’ve just had one of the best meals of my life. At a streetside restaurant in Tainan, Taiwan. From the clams steamed in sake to the AMAZING tempura fried oyster mushroom - plus 2 beers the waiter helped me buy next door. Total cost: £15?
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
That's an excellent question. Those thinking it's all just malingering are wrong, I think.
Look forward to your header.
Schools - bullying and social media. Exams - pressure from schools for their pupils to go to university.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
The important bit you are missing, is that the laws aren't applied to *them*.
Generally, such states are quite smart about image. At the Rich Entitled Furinner level, you get kicked out for most law breaches. Jail is reserved for those who fuck up in ways the local rulers find especially annoying or embarrassing.
So it's largely consequence free - go work for a bank (or whatever) there, for 10 years. Make a pile. Unless you do something stupid like start a joint venture with a High Level local and lose all his money, you will be fine.
Yes the loud objections those same people have to any soupçon of Sharia-like law here, which are always in the context of Muslim communities applying them to themselves, imply they they really do care about laws not applied to *them* when it suits the narrative.
Starmer's getting some sensible advice at last. This might be the start of the big turn-around........He might even get his own MPs back onside
Because Syria went so well after labour prevented decisive action
Labour did the right thing. It was Assad or Isis.
No they did not, and no it was not.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Starmer's getting some sensible advice at last. This might be the start of the big turn-around........He might even get his own MPs back onside
Because Syria went so well after labour prevented decisive action
Labour did the right thing. It was Assad or Isis.
No they did not, and no it was not.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Why am I not surprised you’re overwhelmingly in favour of another potential ill fated. Idle east venture 😂
Yes they did, and yes it was.
Well done Ed. Exceptional judgement, did the right thing.
Keep the warmongers at bay. Not our fight, not our battle. We’ve done too much shit in the Middle East that’s gone wrong.
Anyway we had people operating in Syria during the civil war, operating against ISIS. Including killing a commander and the fat executioner with a shot from several miles away.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
Some rich people are quite happy with vile governments, so long as they keep the Head Count ground down.
Starmer's getting some sensible advice at last. This might be the start of the big turn-around........He might even get his own MPs back onside
Because Syria went so well after labour prevented decisive action
Labour did the right thing. It was Assad or Isis.
No they did not, and no it was not.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Yes they did, and yes it was.
Well done Ed. Exceptional judgement, did the right thing.
Keep the warmongers at bay. Not our fight, not our battle. We’ve done too much shit in the Middle East that’s gone wrong.
We've too often done nothing and its gone wrong too.
Inaction is just as harmful as action.
"I have never felt more depressed or, I am bound to say, ashamed this morning that now I have to wake up and see children burning on the television sets - as they were last night - and say that the answer from my country is 'nothing to do with me'". ~ Paddy Ashdown.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
The important bit you are missing, is that the laws aren't applied to *them*.
Generally, such states are quite smart about image. At the Rich Entitled Furinner level, you get kicked out for most law breaches. Jail is reserved for those who fuck up in ways the local rulers find especially annoying or embarrassing.
So it's largely consequence free - go work for a bank (or whatever) there, for 10 years. Make a pile. Unless you do something stupid like start a joint venture with a High Level local and lose all his money, you will be fine.
Yes the loud objections those same people have to any soupçon of Sharia-like law here, which are always in the context of Muslim communities applying them to themselves, imply they they really do care about laws not applied to *them* when it suits the narrative.
I think you misunderstand.
The calculation is quite rational -
1) Sharia law will not be applied to them (excessively) any more than it is applied to the upper class in such countries. That is the settled system. 2) Any sharia type law in the U.K. will be applied to everyone, eventually, due to the idea of equalitarianism in the application of the law.
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
SEND cannot get any worse.
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
Something needs to be done about the burgeoning cost. It won’t be. We already have the well funded lobbyists complaining and getting their views over on the local news.
We had an absurd situation where Newcastle council, due to costs, were going to cease send provision for a group where they had no statutory requirement to provide it.
After a well organised campaign, the council folded.
The language used is very explicit too.
I’m afraid these changes won’t happen.
In Newcastle this demand has increase by 170% since 2015.
It's both economically unsustainable to continue but politically unsustainable to curtail. A recipe for a lot of can kicking and general dissatisfaction.
Even after all the publicity from councils about what they spend money on (that is, mostly adult social care and SEND), people mostly don't want to know and believe they can have everything they had in the past on top of statutory services.
We can't, and we're getting poorer alongside worse services despite paying more.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
Some rich people are quite happy with vile governments, so long as they keep the Head Count ground down.
Or indeed people who think that so long as they are in charge…
All the wanabe revolutionaries/reactionaries I’ve come across seem to think that to they will be in a comfortable office making decisions when The Day arrives.
As opposed to kneeling in the small ditch they’ve just dug.
Starmer's getting some sensible advice at last. This might be the start of the big turn-around........He might even get his own MPs back onside
Because Syria went so well after labour prevented decisive action
Labour did the right thing. It was Assad or Isis.
No they did not, and no it was not.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Why am I not surprised you’re overwhelmingly in favour of another potential ill fated. Idle east venture 😂
Yes they did, and yes it was.
Well done Ed. Exceptional judgement, did the right thing.
Keep the warmongers at bay. Not our fight, not our battle. We’ve done too much shit in the Middle East that’s gone wrong.
Anyway we had people operating in Syria during the civil war, operating against ISIS. Including killing a commander and the fat executioner with a shot from several miles away.
Ed M has revised what his intentions were over time to make them appear more noble. At the time he did not think that was the end of it, so it was not as high minded as he has later pretended, so he cannot get the same level of credit for taking such a stance.
I have walked to pub for lunch and I’ve got a moment to comment on the header. What’s important with this I think I am 100% confident Starmer has NOT said no to Donald Trump about using Uk bases to bomb Iran. Starmer not sure of attempt at regime change, but if it’s just bombing Iran nuclear programme Starmer definitely says YES imo.
I think Starmer probably said yes and no..... He is that stupid when it comes to Politics
Starmer's getting some sensible advice at last. This might be the start of the big turn-around........He might even get his own MPs back onside
Because Syria went so well after labour prevented decisive action
Labour did the right thing. It was Assad or Isis.
No they did not, and no it was not.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Yes they did, and yes it was.
Well done Ed. Exceptional judgement, did the right thing.
Keep the warmongers at bay. Not our fight, not our battle. We’ve done too much shit in the Middle East that’s gone wrong.
We've too often done nothing and its gone wrong too.
Inaction is just as harmful as action.
"I have never felt more depressed or, I am bound to say, ashamed this morning that now I have to wake up and see children burning on the television sets - as they were last night - and say that the answer from my country is 'nothing to do with me'". ~ Paddy Ashdown.
Unless it’s Gaza, of course.
Fuck Paddy Ashdown. If he was so motivated he could have gone and fought. It’s not our concern and nothing to do with us. Cameron got his war with Libya. That went well, didn’t it.
I’m guessing it’s less of an issue when the victims are western bombs because they’re benevolent bombs.
I have walked to pub for lunch and I’ve got a moment to comment on the header. What’s important with this I think I am 100% confident Starmer has NOT said no to Donald Trump about using Uk bases to bomb Iran. Starmer not sure of attempt at regime change, but if it’s just bombing Iran nuclear programme Starmer definitely says YES imo.
I think Starmer probably said yes and no..... He is that stupid when it comes to Politics
Ps Strangerscand Brothers was as good as I remember if .. a bit slow at times but a v h Good watch. You mentioned another series I have forgotten.????
Whilst I don't see Bridget Phillipson as a Leadership Candidate, and I believe she was wrong to let herself be used as a pawn by McSweeney in the Deputy Leadership contest, as an Education Secretary she is increasingly impressive.
The SEND issue is a minefield of malpractice, bad proceeds delay, angst and frustration and a huge cost to the Exchequer.
It would appear that her detailed proposals to be announced tomorrow will be a considered attempt to move the matter forwards, better for the majority of parents and children and for schools.
No doubt some will be loud opponents as is always the case, but hopefully all but the mad left of Labour, and the sensible majority of others will support it.
A big test for Tories and Reform who appear to have no coherent plans and for the Tories whose whole education policy seemed to be run by the crazed nutcase Babslsingh an area where they have zero credibility.
I have worked in SEND one way or another since February 2005.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
SEND cannot get any worse.
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
Something needs to be done about the burgeoning cost. It won’t be. We already have the well funded lobbyists complaining and getting their views over on the local news.
We had an absurd situation where Newcastle council, due to costs, were going to cease send provision for a group where they had no statutory requirement to provide it.
After a well organised campaign, the council folded.
The language used is very explicit too.
I’m afraid these changes won’t happen.
In Newcastle this demand has increase by 170% since 2015.
It's both economically unsustainable to continue but politically unsustainable to curtail. A recipe for a lot of can kicking and general dissatisfaction.
Even after all the publicity from councils about what they spend money on (that is, mostly adult social care and SEND), people mostly don't want to know and believe they can have everything they had in the past on top of statutory services.
We can't, and we're getting poorer alongside worse services despite paying more.
Yes, it’s a depressing scenario and all true.
Same with the triple lock and the benefits bill in general.
Starmer's getting some sensible advice at last. This might be the start of the big turn-around........He might even get his own MPs back onside
Because Syria went so well after labour prevented decisive action
Labour did the right thing. It was Assad or Isis.
No they did not, and no it was not.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Yes they did, and yes it was.
Well done Ed. Exceptional judgement, did the right thing.
Keep the warmongers at bay. Not our fight, not our battle. We’ve done too much shit in the Middle East that’s gone wrong.
We've too often done nothing and its gone wrong too.
Inaction is just as harmful as action.
"I have never felt more depressed or, I am bound to say, ashamed this morning that now I have to wake up and see children burning on the television sets - as they were last night - and say that the answer from my country is 'nothing to do with me'". ~ Paddy Ashdown.
Unless it’s Gaza, of course.
Fuck Paddy Ashdown. If he was so motivated he could have gone and fought. It’s not our concern and nothing to do with us. Cameron got his war with Libya. That went well, didn’t it.
I’m guessing it’s less of an issue when the victims are western bombs because they’re benevolent bombs.
Not sure what point you are trying to make with regards to Gaza.
It was right for Israel to fight Hamas, and it is right for the west to fight Hamas's allies in Iran.
That's entirely logically consistent.
Hamas and the Ayatollahs and their Russian allies and others they are allied with like Hezbollah are utterly evil and need to be vanquished.
SEND: We piss away a fortune on kids too thick to learn, meanwhile those with ability get held back by the delinquent scrotes disrupting their lessons.
It’s similar to the way that many people assume they would have been lords or senators, in past times, when the overwhelming probability is they would have been serfs or slaves. You chance of being a Legate in charge of a Roman legion? About 1 in 17,000. Your chance of toiling on the land, or down a mine, or working on your back in a brothel? About 9 in 10.
Most Middle Eastern governments are evil (including Iran’s). Some are so bad, that even living in a state of nature might be preferable. That could be true of Iran.
Most Middle Eastern governments are medieval.
FTFY
Yet if you read the Telegraph or Speccie the entire British middle class is decamping en masse to the UAE, with its actual statutory Sharia Law, because tax here is a bit high.
Some rich people are quite happy with vile governments, so long as they keep the Head Count ground down.
Or indeed people who think that so long as they are in charge…
All the wanabe revolutionaries/reactionaries I’ve come across seem to think that to they will be in a comfortable office making decisions when The Day arrives.
As opposed to kneeling in the small ditch they’ve just dug.
SEND: We piss away a fortune on kids too thick to learn, meanwhile those with ability get held back by the delinquent scrotes disrupting their lessons.
Comments
One suspects that the American diplomatic view at the moment is that this can all be over quickly if Khemani and his ministers get on a plane to Moscow - the alternative being a couple of hundred US aircraft already in the region, locked and loaded…
I am not supporting or agreeing with President TACO whom I have zero respect for and I hold little faith he will do the right thing here or anywhere else.
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/54025-us-military-intervention-iran-little-support-half-americans-think-likely-to-happen-soon-january-30-february-2-2026-economist-yougov-poll
https://www.timesofisrael.com/59-of-israelis-support-joining-potential-us-strikes-on-iran-poll-finds/
In D&D terms, the Joker is Chaotic Evil, Superman is Lawful Good, while Batman is Chaotic Good.
While good is better than evil, lawful is not always better than chaos. The thing that is worse in the long-term than Chaotic Evil, is Lawful Evil, which the Iranian regime is.
Or in Orwellian terms, "a boot stamping on a human face - forever".
A concerted effort is ideal.
Unconcerted attacks at least will weaken the regime and help give protestors more of a fighting chance, even if they'll still be heavily outnumbered.
Taking no action is the worst of all outcomes.
Better any action than no action.
The Tories on the other hand are going to have a hell of a job convincing voters that Reform have no chance if they have been leading the polls for most of this parliament.
Labour will almost certainly go in to the next GE as the strongest party on the left and therefore find it easier to mop up tactical votes from Greens, Lib Dems and Nats in seats where they are clearly the main challengers to Reform or the Tories. Unless Reform declines rapidly the right is going to be badly split going into the next GE and that could hand Labour a comfortable majority on 30-35% of the vote
I think chaotic evil is preferable to a State like Nazi Germany, 18th century Haiti, or Democratic Kampuchea.
What you have said is wrong.
If the proposals are as leaked, they would make things more expensive, more difficult and open several nasty legal minefields. Crucially, they would make it very difficult for schools to *refuse* provision if asked, and might actually make the exams farrago worse than it already is (and believe me it's bad at the moment as the JCQ has got into a tailspin).
You should also remember that the DfE is run by SEND deniers, which is not helpful in formulating worthwhile policy.
Ultimately, @turbotubbs makes a sensible point about the numbers but is asking the wrong question. We should instead be asking, what is about our schools and exam systems that is causing so much stress and anxiety?
Bridget Phillipson is unfortunately herself a dogmatic idiot with a very limited grasp of the real issues. Apparently she spends a significant chunk of each day emailing the heads of private schools in a highly personal manner saying how much she hates them. Why even she thinks that is a good use of her time, I do not know.
I have written a thread header on this but I've had no time to send it in, and I thought I'd wait for the actual nonsense to be published because what's been published is unworkable. So either it's kite flying, or somebody is about to get dumped all over from a great height when Labour u-turn.
People make out like chaos is a bad thing, but regimented "lawful" evil is far worse.
Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Putin's Russia, North Korea, modern Iran etc - or the Empire in Star Wars etc - authoritarian evil dictatorships are worse than chaos and worse than anarchy.
Other than in areas of real strength some v labour, some v LD Green vote will mean a possible Reform or Tory MP and the average Green voter will have the intellect to understand that.
Only Jeremy Hunt can save the Tories at the next General Election.
It's just that Sri Lanka were even further behind the run rate..
My daughter took her SATs last year at the end of primary school and did not finish it in time, but was also advised they're not expected to finish it in time. If we'd played the system to get her extra time, she could have got extra marks, so did we do the wrong thing in not doing that?
When I sat my International Baccalaureate I only sat it with other bright kids so I don't know if it was the norm or not (only 12 kids in my school took the IB and all ex top-set kids) but we all finished our exams with plenty of time to spare and left our exams early. I don't know if that was the norm, or just us, but there should be enough time in regular time to finish the exam and go through and double-check your work and then think "there's nothing else I can do now", rather than be seeking to extract every extra minute you can to eek out extra marks.
Exams IMHO should be about what you know, in a careful and considered way, not a sprint against a clock.
But predicting the future is hard, and the status quo in Iran is intolerable, so I do not see fear of what might follow the fall of the Iranian regime as an argument against taking action. It would be an argument in favour of providing support to the most promising elements in what followed the fall of the regime.
That said, the point of maximum danger for the regime in Iran has passed. Airstrikes now would be largely futile. I'm not sure it's worth picking sides between a Trump campaign to extort money and the Ayatollahs though. I would advocate for Britain to neither participate nor condemn.
There's not much sign Hunt wants the job, and there's even less sign that the job wants Hunt.
As for Cleverley, he's only really the answer in the Michael Howard sense- self-aware enough to know that his job is to keep the lights on while someone better emerges. Flip knows who that is.
In answer to you point about extra time, yes that is true but it's actually incredibly hard in my experience to get extra time and anyone just 'gaming the system' won't manage it - there are simply too many hoops to jump through and everything has to be either perfect or Bleeding Obvious (as in, preventing somebody from eating the pencil by mistake) to progress. EHCPs are a bit different because there access arrangements are managed by the school. But they're a bugger to get. It's much more normal in my experience to see children who should have one but doesn't get it than one who shouldn't get it but has one.
If, however, this is devolved onto schools who don't have the resources to fight court cases and are in direct personal contact with the people asking - and who, moreover, have a vested interest in getting the best results possible - does anyone who is not as stupid as Susan Acland-Hood, a woman who let us not forgotten has admitted drinking alcohol at work, really think that will cause a reduction in assessed need or access arrangements?
The Iranian regime’s claim has always been that the protestors are agitators put up to it by their foreign enemies. Bombings clearly play into that narrative.
Maybe some attacks now can do more good than harm, but to achieve that will need more than your gung-ho optimism for chaos. It will need careful military planning and coordination. Are we going to get that from Trump or Bibi? Trump will sell the protestors down the river for $100 million in his private bank account from the Iranian government.
Those thinking it's all just malingering are wrong, I think.
Look forward to your header.
Yes kids, they are very hypocritical - lots of Iranian regime brats getting drunk in the fashionable cocktail bars and shopping the hell out of Burlington Arcade.
Anyway, I’m waiting for the impassioned pleas for asylum for “noble religious scholars”
Firstly you could apply the medical principle of, "first do no harm." I think that would be a pretty good basis for foreign policy. Worth remembering that it was British and US meddling in Iran, supporting the Shah against a democratic politician, that paved the way for the current Iranian regime.
So doing nothing, in the absence of a course of action that has a well-founded hope for success, is often the right action.
Secondly, politics is almost always about choices. You choose to do one thing and you are choosing not to do another. There are many places in the world where diplomatic and military effort would be more beneficial than a campaign of airstrikes against Iran.
*For the avoidance of doubt neither he nor I were inmates at the time.
https://x.com/MsMalarkey24/status/2025382198891647260
We cannot have more and more poor little kids enrolled on to it with our proper medical examinations or regular check ups.
What occurs when literally every child is diagnosed as being unable or unwilling to face modern life.
At what point is the State, whoever is in power, going to have to take responsibility for every child?
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
There are undoubtedly some genuine cases there always have been but we had parents who could parent and dare zi say we were just told to get on with it, deal with it, stop bellyaching.
SEND has become a badge of fucking honour for too many, can't read, can't write, can't talk, stressed, never taught thsre is a word
NO
You ask what is making our schools and exams so stressful.
They are not more stressful than they were 50 years ago belive me, nor 40 nor 30...
At some point we started to produce a won't do culture, we started excusing laziness, we started blaming everyone else rather than look at ourselves.
We stopped believing that the cream does rise to the top and that was fine as log as equality of opportunity was in place.
We stopped believing that winning was to be proud of and that losing should be a lesson and a spur to improve.
Yes the polit8left have to take more blame for that but we have to stop this shit show, spend funding more sensibly, spend it so it delivers a route OUT not a route to a lifetime of mediocrity.
Maybe then the small number in genuine need will get the help they really need and those that don't, and thar means parents will be told to grow some backbone and learn parenting skills that the parents and gran parents of my generation had in spades. Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect
https://conservativehome.com/2025/08/07/the-return-of-boris-tory-voters-are-looking-back-to-the-future/
British action in Sierra Leone was generally welcomed.
The Western toppling of Japanese puppet government across south east Asia during WWII was generally supported by local populations.
Trump is ranting about hairspray “destroying the ozone” like it’s still 1975.
CFCs were banned decades ago.
Modern aerosols aren’t the problem.
This man is governing off expired talking points and half-remembered cable news from 50 years ago.
https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/2025387390525636928
Tories on the other hand in seats where there is a Tory MP can much more easily say to Labour, LD and even Green voters only they can beat Reform in Tory held seats
https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
What happens when 50% of children are classed as SEND and they interbreed and we get to the point that every child can't deal with basic functions and the State is expected to sort it out.
That’s some @SeanT grade social darwinist “genetics” there.
You need to read some actual science in hurry before you start banging on about “ballast existences”
There doesn't seem to be a smidgeon of interest anywhere beyond SEND advocates to explore or consider this aspect.
So the bast 47 years has really, really turned young people in Iran off the idea of The Religious State.
They will, of course, find a different disaster to back. Such is history.
FTFY
2) We don't, so I'm not sure what your point is. All SEND plans are reviewed annually anyway. I spend a great deal of time and get paid a fair sum of money for doing it at this very time of year (I actually have six in my inbox right now).
3) Maybe we'll finally ask the right questions?
4) Legally, it already does have the statutory duty, and has done since 1908, as amended by the notorious softy and bleeding heart liberal Margaret Thatcher in the Children's Act 1989.
5) It is slightly disturbing, especially in light of some of your earlier comments this morning, that I have to tell you Goebbels asked that same question in almost those exact same phrases in 1935. I think I don't need to tell you what it led to.
6) I hate to break it to you but having made an actual study of exam papers over the last 140 years as part of my degree, modern A-levels and GCSEs are considerably harder than their earlier equivalents and - here is another point you have forgotten - until 1986 there was no expectation that all children would sit them. Until that time most people who had what we would now identify as SEND would sit CSEs, which were a very different kettle of fish and before 1947 it was extremely common to leave school at 14 with no exam results at all.
7) To quote Jeremy Bentham, that is nonsense on stilts. One reason for the problems with the current exam system is that too many people who got where they are by passing difficult exams, including, for example, the entrance assessments for the Civil Service (which I also coach people for) which measure the ability to pass exams and not their understanding of any particular topic.
8) As I have repeatedly pointed out, if the reforms are as described they would almost certainly have precisely the opposite effect. We will see if they are. Most likely, the real issue is the one you have demonstrated with quite alarming clarity - a total of lack of understanding of the problems and the causes.
I think the examples are few and far between in recent years. Outside the world wars I struggle to find meaningful examples that weren’t internally driven.
Now, there is an obvious internal momentum in Iran towards revolution. Whether external action strengthens or weakens that is hard to tell, but I imagine the anti regime protestors probably on balance would like the US to act against the Iranian military.
It’s honestly a moral dilemma of the highest order. Easier if you’re either a committed non-interventionist (“none of our business”) or directly threatened by Iran, like Israel.
One person who did ask the right questions was Blunkett, for I think the very obvious reason, although the quality of his answers was uneven. Since then, nothing.
On 5) - has anyone measure the number of grams of essential fats consumed by the ballast existences referred to?
on 8) "Tough love and that did sometimes include a belt and room confinement and grounding. Respect" - The belt???
I'll forgive him a lot for having seen through that utter Tristram.
It is not a reason to object to action against the regime, it is a reason to push for that action to be firmer and more unremitting and to put pressure on Trump not to sell out the protestors, instead of giving him every excuse to do so.
Generally, such states are quite smart about image. At the Rich Entitled Furinner level, you get kicked out for most law breaches. Jail is reserved for those who fuck up in ways the local rulers find especially annoying or embarrassing.
So it's largely consequence free - go work for a bank (or whatever) there, for 10 years. Make a pile. Unless you do something stupid like start a joint venture with a High Level local and lose all his money, you will be fine.
We had an absurd situation where Newcastle council, due to costs, were going to cease send provision for a group where they had no statutory requirement to provide it.
After a well organised campaign, the council folded.
The language used is very explicit too.
I’m afraid these changes won’t happen.
In Newcastle this demand has increase by 170% since 2015.
It’s unsustainable and a legacy of the Tories.
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/newcastle-council-send-school-transport-32715891
Taiwan. Take a bow
Exams - pressure from schools for their pupils to go to university.
There were other rebel groups beyond Isis. Unfortunately after Labour* and Obama caved, the non-Isis rebel groups largely got slaughtered by Assad and the Russians.
* and it was not entirely Labour's fault, they were on the opposition. Shame on the Lib Dems and Tories that opposed action too.
Man shot dead (executed more like, eh readers !) trying to enter Trump home in Mar-A-Lago
https://news.sky.com/story/us-secret-service-shoots-dead-man-who-tried-to-unlawfully-enter-trumps-mar-a-lago-estate-13510750
Yes they did, and yes it was.
Well done Ed. Exceptional judgement, did the right thing.
Keep the warmongers at bay. Not our fight, not our battle. We’ve done too much shit in the Middle East that’s gone wrong.
Anyway we had people operating in Syria during the civil war, operating against ISIS. Including killing a commander and the fat executioner with a shot from several miles away.
Inaction is just as harmful as action.
"I have never felt more depressed or, I am bound to say, ashamed this morning that now I have to wake up and see children burning on the television sets - as they were last night - and say that the answer from my country is 'nothing to do with me'". ~ Paddy Ashdown.
The calculation is quite rational -
1) Sharia law will not be applied to them (excessively) any more than it is applied to the upper class in such countries. That is the settled system.
2) Any sharia type law in the U.K. will be applied to everyone, eventually, due to the idea of equalitarianism in the application of the law.
I suspect Florida Man was involved.
Even after all the publicity from councils about what they spend money on (that is, mostly adult social care and SEND), people mostly don't want to know and believe they can have everything they had in the past on top of statutory services.
We can't, and we're getting poorer alongside worse services despite paying more.
All the wanabe revolutionaries/reactionaries I’ve come across seem to think that to they will be in a comfortable office making decisions when The Day arrives.
As opposed to kneeling in the small ditch they’ve just dug.
Fuck Paddy Ashdown. If he was so motivated he could have gone and fought. It’s not our concern and nothing to do with us. Cameron got his war with Libya. That went well, didn’t it.
I’m guessing it’s less of an issue when the victims are western bombs because they’re benevolent bombs.
Good watch. You mentioned another series I have forgotten.????
Same with the triple lock and the benefits bill in general.
It was right for Israel to fight Hamas, and it is right for the west to fight Hamas's allies in Iran.
That's entirely logically consistent.
Hamas and the Ayatollahs and their Russian allies and others they are allied with like Hezbollah are utterly evil and need to be vanquished.
It’s similar to the way that many people assume they would have been lords or senators, in past times, when the overwhelming probability is they would have been serfs or slaves. You chance of being a Legate in charge of a Roman legion? About 1 in 17,000. Your chance of toiling on the land, or down a mine, or working on your back in a brothel? About 9 in 10.
1-1 against the US in the ice hockey gold medal match.
If only because they made us feel slenderly superior
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/22/we-will-miss-the-fat-american/
If so, where can I buy the Hallmark card to go with it?