Am I being a bit slow ! Surely the wholesale price would still go up a lot similar to the US .
Indeed it does. But say, as a example, oil prices go up 50% and half the cost of UK fuel is duty and none of the cost in the US is duty then US fuel prices rise 50% and UK prices rise 25%.
Nico - where you might be going wrong is that fuel duty in the UK is, I think, x pence per litre, rather than x% of the retail price. If it were the latter, prices would rise by the same proportion, as you expect. But because the duty per litre is fixed at an absolute, changes to the oil price are muted. I think?
Exactly. Basically, when you buy fuel half is buying the fuel plus VAT and half is fuel duty. It's only the first half that rises and falls with oil prices (not exactly half). In the US taxes are way lower so they pay less but are more exposed to price rises in % terms.
The situation this morning seems to be that Donald Trump has partially calmed the oil market with vague statements about the war being a short one but Hormuz is still closed, Iran is still lobbing drones at its neighbours, and Israel is bombing Lebanon as it always does.
Hormuz isn’t closed. Some ships still transit it. Transponders off !!
It's effectively closed as far as the global oil market is concerned, though.
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
Given the ineptitude and in some cases, open criminality of large chains of solicitors the loss of smaller firms would actually be a major disaster. There has surely got to be a better way of managing them than this,
YEP
Crap advice on Legal Aid, mostly in local Cop Stations, form filling and being an integral part of the log jam
The same amount of opposition in the US to the strikes as the UK, 59%, on that poll but more clearly in favour, 41%, Republicans Trump will be pleased to see still strongly in favour, 77% of GOP voters back the strikes still even if most Democrats and Independents are opposed.
Although 'MAGA Republicans are 30 points more likely than non-MAGA Republicans to say they strongly approve of the decision to take military action'. So a similar divide as here with more 'MAGA' rightwing Reform voters more in favour of the strikes than traditional conservative Tories
I believe that poll is a bit out of date and the longer it goes on the more opposed MAGA is getting.
Those who would like to see the Iranian theocracy overthrown (and it's a laudable aim to a point) are obviously going to be disappointed with Trump's current musings. It seems we have defanged the tiger but the tiger lives and will grow new fangs.
Rather like trying to control immigration or public spending, I've yet to see anyone come up with a coherent scenario for regime change in Iran that doesn't involve American (or someone else's) ground troops or some form of invasion/incursion.
The truth is it's all about the oil and securing the Gulf States - the "freedom of the Iranian people" may be a nice slogan but that's all it is - it's not worth a single American life to free them and if they end up under one dictatorship or another, as long as the oil flows, no one in Washington or frankly anywhere else will care.
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
I’ve got to say I really don’t understand the logic of this.
Either the money belongs to the clients (it should) and should be taxed as income if received; or it belongs to the solicitors and should be taxed as part of their partnership profits (this would include if it is used as an offset to fees because it is effectively revenue).
I suppose theoretically there is a small loophole (if it is used as an offset then it should be taxed as income for the client and then taxed as revenue for the solicitor) but I’m not sure that the quantum of money involved makes it worth the effort.
But the government shouldn’t be taxing it directly
The situation this morning seems to be that Donald Trump has partially calmed the oil market with vague statements about the war being a short one but Hormuz is still closed, Iran is still lobbing drones at its neighbours, and Israel is bombing Lebanon as it always does.
Hormuz isn’t closed. Some ships still transit it. Transponders off !!
OK, wording change. Hormuz is effectively closed. Not enough goods going through to make a material difference.
Bout 35% but if Saudi Armco can increase the throughput in the next couple of days on the pipeline to the Red Sea by 6 million barrels that’s a big help
Despite the anti Kemi sentiment on here I have yet to see any evidence it has affected her ratings, the conservatives are a different question
What you don't get is that nobody cares what she thinks. She's a warmonger. End of interest. Compare with Zack who is actually saying what the public are thinking.
""The Green party would oversee a vast increase in taxation & public spending," notes the FT in an analysis of the Greens' barmy policy agenda.
"The party’s manifesto pledges would increase taxes by over £170bn per year, including a £90bn carbon tax per year, to fund a £160bn boost to day-to-day public spending on things like the NHS." There would be wealth taxes on assets over £10m, doubling of CGT & NI levied on investment income. People wouldn't stick around in the UK.
There would also be a huge increase in welfare spending from an unlimited expansion in immigration. The FT quotes even the leftist IPPR think-tank as saying that Green policies would “radically increase migration to Britain”, & that “there would basically be no restrictions at all”. Another leftist outfit, the IFS, says borrowing would have to increase by £80bn.."
Not massively appealing. But this who believe they have no stake in society might think 'why not ?'.
A bit like Brexit, "I'm alright (steady pension and mortgage-free), let's f**k the economy up"
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
So to be blunt the only money keeping high street solicitors going is the interest on their client accounts that probably should be being paid to their clients
Yes, the alternative is to increase billing rates.
This isn't the stop the war coalition; this is public sentiment.
And the phrasing of the question probably has an impact here. If it were phrased: "Do you support or oppose the UK taking military action against Iran?" it might get a different response.
That's an interesting question, and certainly a possibility.
The biggest driver would be whether HMG were advocating for it and making the case, or not; if it were, I'd expect we'd see a 40:40 split in opinion, which would be a majority if the RAF, say, went into action.
People don't like to admit their opinion can be led, but it is.
Didn't realise you had such faith in the explanatory and persuasive powers of Keir Starmer!
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
So to be blunt the only money keeping high street solicitors going is the interest on their client accounts that probably should be being paid to their clients
Yes, the alternative is to increase billing rates.
Fee transparency is a good thing
Transparency so that you can see through them, or transparent so you can't see them?
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
So to be blunt the only money keeping high street solicitors going is the interest on their client accounts that probably should be being paid to their clients
To be fair to Lammy he has increased legal aid fees for high street criminal law firms at the same time, legal aid for magistrates court appearances has increased by 10% and prison law fees by 24% with a standard £320 fee for police station schemes
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
With the Iraq war, the war itself was planned, long prepared and highly successful.
The failure was to plan for “what’s next” and that’s what triggered the problem
I don't think you can easily separate objectives from execution, otherwise Napoleon's invasion of Russia would also count as a success. In both cases the execution was premised on completely wrong assumptions
The situation this morning seems to be that Donald Trump has partially calmed the oil market with vague statements about the war being a short one but Hormuz is still closed, Iran is still lobbing drones at its neighbours, and Israel is bombing Lebanon as it always does.
Hormuz isn’t closed. Some ships still transit it. Transponders off !!
R4 reporting that's maximum 10% of normal transits and it won't be the oil majors, it'll be the shadier par of the tanker fleet
The situation this morning seems to be that Donald Trump has partially calmed the oil market with vague statements about the war being a short one but Hormuz is still closed, Iran is still lobbing drones at its neighbours, and Israel is bombing Lebanon as it always does.
Hormuz isn’t closed. Some ships still transit it. Transponders off !!
It's effectively closed as far as the global oil market is concerned, though.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
Despite the anti Kemi sentiment on here I have yet to see any evidence it has affected her ratings, the conservatives are a different question
What you don't get is that nobody cares what she thinks. She's a warmonger. End of interest. Compare with Zack who is actually saying what the public are thinking.
LOL
That's the way it works. The public follow those who share their view. It's the basis of how you sell things. Those who think it works the other way round are wrong!
Despite the anti Kemi sentiment on here I have yet to see any evidence it has affected her ratings, the conservatives are a different question
There is little anti-Kemi sentiment on here as far as I am aware, Big G. Her personal stock remains solid. She may have misjudged this one, but she's a LOTO and can get away with that as long as she retains personal credibility, which does not look to me to be in danger.
Her problem remains her Party, as it was for her predecessor, and a few more before him.
Didn't the Party vote her in? And if the Party is the problem what does that say about the people they vote it - May, Truss, Rishi, Boris and now Kemi?
The members voted her in but only 35% of Tory MPs voted for Kemi in the final round. In that sense she has the same problem Truss and IDS had, even though the members voted for them less than 40% of Tory MPs voted for them and Truss and IDS were removed by Tory MPs as leaders (at least Truss would have been had she not resigned) before they could lead the party into a general election. So Kemi is still at risk of being removed by VONC by her own MPs if the party's polling and election results do not improve.
May won most seats at a general election and Boris won a landslide majority from UK voters so it was not just the party that voted for them but the largest percentage of UK voters too
The same amount of opposition in the US to the strikes as the UK, 59%, on that poll but more clearly in favour, 41%, Republicans Trump will be pleased to see still strongly in favour, 77% of GOP voters back the strikes still even if most Democrats and Independents are opposed.
Although 'MAGA Republicans are 30 points more likely than non-MAGA Republicans to say they strongly approve of the decision to take military action'. So a similar divide as here with more 'MAGA' rightwing Reform voters more in favour of the strikes than traditional conservative Tories
I believe that poll is a bit out of date and the longer it goes on the more opposed MAGA is getting.
I have not seen a single poll where MAGA voters are not still overwhelmingly in favour of the US strikes on Iran
The insanity of politicians telling us that diversity is our strength, and warning of people using the problems in the Middle East to stir up trouble by dividing Muslims and Jews is gaslighting of the highest order. The fact we have imported so many people who feel deeply about what is happening in the Middle East and subcontinent is the cause of the divide. Most English people don’t care
I posted this last night, and @foxy replied saying the polling on our involvement in war proves me wrong. I disagree, he misses my point. It’s not military intervention that people don’t care about, it’s the Middle East. If we drew a big line around that part of the world, and the subcontinent, and never mentioned them again, most people wouldn’t care less. It’s due to mass immigration that there are so many with passionate views on the problem that lead to division, so it’s an imported problem that we didn’t need. Most normal English people are happy to let the mad mullahs do what they like as long as they don’t do it here and we are not involved
Diversity is not our strength, it is our Achilles heel
The mad Mullahs were just doing what they liked and most people here weren't that bothered until the Israelis and Americans started lobbing bombs at them and we got dragged into it. Now there's a war going on it is Reform voters who are massively out of line with the median opinion, not the wokerati or minorities. As for the middle east more broadly, plenty of people of all backgrounds are exercised by it, as is only right when tens of thousands of people are being killed while the West wrings its hands. Diversity has sweet FA to do with it.
If we hadn’t imported millions of Muslims, there would be no need for politicians to address the supposed issue of people using the war to stir up division between Muslims and Jews, whilst pretending these imported issues were some kind of ‘strength’
The situation this morning seems to be that Donald Trump has partially calmed the oil market with vague statements about the war being a short one but Hormuz is still closed, Iran is still lobbing drones at its neighbours, and Israel is bombing Lebanon as it always does.
Hormuz isn’t closed. Some ships still transit it. Transponders off !!
OK, wording change. Hormuz is effectively closed. Not enough goods going through to make a material difference.
Bout 35% but if Saudi Armco can increase the throughput in the next couple of days on the pipeline to the Red Sea by 6 million barrels that’s a big help
Are you sure? 3 ships went through Hormuz on 8 March, the latest data from Lloyds. Admittedly this is before Trump's speech.
Despite the anti Kemi sentiment on here I have yet to see any evidence it has affected her ratings, the conservatives are a different question
What you don't get is that nobody cares what she thinks. She's a warmonger. End of interest. Compare with Zack who is actually saying what the public are thinking.
""The Green party would oversee a vast increase in taxation & public spending," notes the FT in an analysis of the Greens' barmy policy agenda.
"The party’s manifesto pledges would increase taxes by over £170bn per year, including a £90bn carbon tax per year, to fund a £160bn boost to day-to-day public spending on things like the NHS." There would be wealth taxes on assets over £10m, doubling of CGT & NI levied on investment income. People wouldn't stick around in the UK.
There would also be a huge increase in welfare spending from an unlimited expansion in immigration. The FT quotes even the leftist IPPR think-tank as saying that Green policies would “radically increase migration to Britain”, & that “there would basically be no restrictions at all”. Another leftist outfit, the IFS, says borrowing would have to increase by £80bn.."
Not massively appealing. But this who believe they have no stake in society might think 'why not ?'.
A Green government would be a disaster, if Polanski became PM to misquote the Sun in 1992 it really would be a case of 'if Polanski wins would the last person to leave the UK please turn out the lights!'
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
I’ve got to say I really don’t understand the logic of this.
Either the money belongs to the clients (it should) and should be taxed as income if received; or it belongs to the solicitors and should be taxed as part of their partnership profits (this would include if it is used as an offset to fees because it is effectively revenue).
I suppose theoretically there is a small loophole (if it is used as an offset then it should be taxed as income for the client and then taxed as revenue for the solicitor) but I’m not sure that the quantum of money involved makes it worth the effort.
But the government shouldn’t be taxing it directly
Well for a start it is not a “tax raid” - What the Government is thinking of is using interest on client accounts to help fund legal aid. Using client account interest in this way is common in other countries.
Of course what should really happen is clients should get the interest - it is their money and their interest. However, as most client money is swept into a single client account then that is difficult to allocate the interest to the correct client (albeit I dare say virtual account products could make that simple - but not free).
So the money helps fund solicitors either directly (the interest is skimmed off) or the banks offer them a non-interest bearing client account and also something better for their business account (cheaper lending that sort of thing). Either way the solicitors currently get the benefit of, as Father Ted would say “the money just resting in my account.”
In my opinion the solicitors have no leg to stand on in this area. How can an “ethical” profession justify keeping money that is not their’s or screwing over their clients with zero interest in order to benefit themselves? Other than to say that if you take away this revenue (or the advantageous arrangements from the banks to the solicitor firms that ensue) then solicitors will simply put up fees where they can. And is all that and the various belly aching it worth the revenue you can get for legal aid?
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Interesting to see Rupert Lowe and Restore have come out firmly against the bombings and any UK involvement. And making the link between war and migration.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi and his supporters were open about intending to massacre opponents in the East of the country. And, he had carried out numerous acts of war against the UK. Finally the dildo of consequences arrived for him.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Had Saddam still been in power he would almost certainly be supplying arms to Putin to use against Ukraine as well as continuing to back terrorists around the world and torturing opponents of his regime
Interesting to see Rupert Lowe and Restore have come out firmly against the bombings and any UK involvement. And making the link between war and migration.
Thinking man's Fascist.
He is not easy to pin down.
If the Tories want to take on Farage he'd be a very effective Leader and streets ahead of Badenoch.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi arranged for the blowing up of an airliner over Scotland, it was Libyan rebels who removed him, the West just provided air cover
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi arranged for the blowing up of an airliner over Scotland, it was Libyan rebels who removed him, the West just provided air cover
And, he provided weapons, training, and finance to PIRA.
The insanity of politicians telling us that diversity is our strength, and warning of people using the problems in the Middle East to stir up trouble by dividing Muslims and Jews is gaslighting of the highest order. The fact we have imported so many people who feel deeply about what is happening in the Middle East and subcontinent is the cause of the divide. Most English people don’t care
I posted this last night, and @foxy replied saying the polling on our involvement in war proves me wrong. I disagree, he misses my point. It’s not military intervention that people don’t care about, it’s the Middle East. If we drew a big line around that part of the world, and the subcontinent, and never mentioned them again, most people wouldn’t care less. It’s due to mass immigration that there are so many with passionate views on the problem that lead to division, so it’s an imported problem that we didn’t need. Most normal English people are happy to let the mad mullahs do what they like as long as they don’t do it here and we are not involved
Diversity is not our strength, it is our Achilles heel
We clearly move in different circles, but I'm encountering more people of diverse political opinions expressing worry over the Middle East than I can remember on any other topic. None of them so far have linked it to immigration - they see it as a global risk. That doesn't include anyone who is noticeably Muslim or Jewish.
I think that, like most people who feel very strongly about one issue, you tend to link everything else to it. Most people are not sure we've got the balance right on immigration, but it's a second-order issue for most.
Despite the anti Kemi sentiment on here I have yet to see any evidence it has affected her ratings, the conservatives are a different question
There is little anti-Kemi sentiment on here as far as I am aware, Big G. Her personal stock remains solid. She may have misjudged this one, but she's a LOTO and can get away with that as long as she retains personal credibility, which does not look to me to be in danger.
Her problem remains her Party, as it was for her predecessor, and a few more before him.
Didn't the Party vote her in? And if the Party is the problem what does that say about the people they vote it - May, Truss, Rishi, Boris and now Kemi?
The members voted her in but only 35% of Tory MPs voted for Kemi in the final round. In that sense she has the same problem Truss and IDS had, even though the members voted for them less than 40% of Tory MPs voted for them and Truss and IDS were removed by Tory MPs as leaders (at least Truss would have been had she not resigned) before they could lead the party into a general election. So Kemi is still at risk of being removed by VONC by her own MPs if the party's polling and election results do not improve.
May won most seats at a general election and Boris won a landslide majority from UK voters so it was not just the party that voted for them but the largest percentage of UK voters too
You are a broken record
If you put 2 broken records in a bag is it a broken double album
Reform voters continue to be wrong about everything.
A few months ago there were a bunch of reform voters campaigning in Warminster high street. The last time we had active campaigners was labour under Corbyn and I told them that I could never vote for them with him in charge. But they didn't raise in my a feeling of intense disgust and loathing that I had when I saw the Reform crowd. Whether its the racism, the desire to return to an imagined (and fake) past, or the fact that they were all triple-lock pension wankers wanting to shit on the younger generations, I can't say, but I took myself away rapidly rather than cause an affray in a place that I love.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
In what way is the destruction of Iran's military capacity a 'much bigger fucking disaster' ?
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Didn't we, at any rate, have it in for Gaddafi a) because of his support for the IRA and b) because of Lockerbie?
The insanity of politicians telling us that diversity is our strength, and warning of people using the problems in the Middle East to stir up trouble by dividing Muslims and Jews is gaslighting of the highest order. The fact we have imported so many people who feel deeply about what is happening in the Middle East and subcontinent is the cause of the divide. Most English people don’t care
I posted this last night, and @foxy replied saying the polling on our involvement in war proves me wrong. I disagree, he misses my point. It’s not military intervention that people don’t care about, it’s the Middle East. If we drew a big line around that part of the world, and the subcontinent, and never mentioned them again, most people wouldn’t care less. It’s due to mass immigration that there are so many with passionate views on the problem that lead to division, so it’s an imported problem that we didn’t need. Most normal English people are happy to let the mad mullahs do what they like as long as they don’t do it here and we are not involved
Diversity is not our strength, it is our Achilles heel
We clearly move in different circles, but I'm encountering more people of diverse political opinions expressing worry over the Middle East than I can remember on any other topic. None of them so far have linked it to immigration - they see it as a global risk. That doesn't include anyone who is noticeably Muslim or Jewish.
I think that, like most people who feel very strongly about one issue, you tend to link everything else to it. Most people are not sure we've got the balance right on immigration, but it's a second-order issue for most.
It certainly seems to resonate among at least some of the young. Both my son and step-daughter and many of their non-Muslim and non-Jewish friends have pretty strong feelings about what is happening in the Middle East and are planning to vote accordingly. And, as you say, they don't much care about immigration; tuition fees, cost of living, house prices and employment figure much more highly.
The thing that’s a bit strange is the relative spike in fuel prices has been higher in the USA than in the UK .
The average price in the US has gone up 60c a gallon , equivalent to around 20% .
That's always the case, because a much bigger share of the UK fuel price is a fixed tax (fuel duty).
Fuel duty is quite interesting - a kind of inflation moderator. And given it's been cut significantly in real terms since 2010 (about 1/3rd), it had even more of a stabilising effect a couple of decades ago.
I wonder if more taxes should be collected like that - VAT tends to exacerbate inflation and make government revenues relatively unpredictable, while duties do the opposite.
This Labour government is the worst ever, imagine a world without solicitors.
Law Society chief: Lammy risks triggering collapse of high street firms
Justice Secretary warned that ‘once the solicitors have left town, they won’t go back’
David Lammy’s planned £100m tax raid on the legal industry risks forcing swathes of high street solicitors out of business, the head of the Law Society has warned.
Mark Evans, the new president of the Law Society, which represents more than 200,000 solicitors, said that the Justice Secretary’s proposals to start taxing interest payments earned on money in client accounts threatened to prove the final nail in the coffin for local law firms.
He said they risked having a permanent effect on Britain’s high streets at a time when many town and city centres are already grappling with rising vacancy rates.
Given the ineptitude and in some cases, open criminality of large chains of solicitors the loss of smaller firms would actually be a major disaster. There has surely got to be a better way of managing them than this,
YEP
Crap advice on Legal Aid, mostly in local Cop Stations, form filling and being an integral part of the log jam
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
So you're saying we should have taken military action against the Libyan uprising in order to keep Gaddafi in power ?
Doubtless if we had done, with the consequent slaughter and refugees, then we would have been condemned for causing a 'fucking disaster'.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Had Saddam still been in power he would almost certainly be supplying arms to Putin to use against Ukraine as well as continuing to back terrorists around the world and torturing opponents of his regime
My alternative history has Saddam falling victim to the Arab spring, like (eventually) Assad, probably with Libya style Western intervention, only without the complication of ISIS because they were a product of the post Iraq-war Sunni rebellion.
Interesting to see Rupert Lowe and Restore have come out firmly against the bombings and any UK involvement. And making the link between war and migration.
Thinking man's Fascist.
He is not easy to pin down.
If the Tories want to take on Farage he'd be a very effective Leader and streets ahead of Badenoch.
Lowe is Farage+, can't see many tactical anti Reform votes for the Tories with him as leader
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi and his supporters were open about intending to massacre opponents in the East of the country. And, he had carried out numerous acts of war against the UK. Finally the dildo of consequences arrived for him.
I think it was a bayonet of consequence if I recall correctly.
The insanity of politicians telling us that diversity is our strength, and warning of people using the problems in the Middle East to stir up trouble by dividing Muslims and Jews is gaslighting of the highest order. The fact we have imported so many people who feel deeply about what is happening in the Middle East and subcontinent is the cause of the divide. Most English people don’t care
I posted this last night, and @foxy replied saying the polling on our involvement in war proves me wrong. I disagree, he misses my point. It’s not military intervention that people don’t care about, it’s the Middle East. If we drew a big line around that part of the world, and the subcontinent, and never mentioned them again, most people wouldn’t care less. It’s due to mass immigration that there are so many with passionate views on the problem that lead to division, so it’s an imported problem that we didn’t need. Most normal English people are happy to let the mad mullahs do what they like as long as they don’t do it here and we are not involved
Diversity is not our strength, it is our Achilles heel
We clearly move in different circles, but I'm encountering more people of diverse political opinions expressing worry over the Middle East than I can remember on any other topic. None of them so far have linked it to immigration - they see it as a global risk. That doesn't include anyone who is noticeably Muslim or Jewish.
I think that, like most people who feel very strongly about one issue, you tend to link everything else to it. Most people are not sure we've got the balance right on immigration, but it's a second-order issue for most.
I’m responding to the PM cautioning against attempts to divide ‘communities’ over the Middle Eastern war. Given that those communities, and therefore the issue he is talking about, only exist thanks to mass immigration, it’s not a stretch to link the two, it’s actually impossible not to.
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
In what way is the destruction of Iran's military capacity a 'much bigger fucking disaster' ?
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
It was the way the West, in particular Britain and France, 'sorted out' the Middle East after WWI that brought about the disaster. Including Balfours Declaration.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi and his supporters were open about intending to massacre opponents in the East of the country. And, he had carried out numerous acts of war against the UK. Finally the dildo of consequences arrived for him.
I think it was a bayonet of consequence if I recall correctly.
An unpleasant way to go, chosen presumably, because he was a serial rapist.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Had Saddam still been in power he would almost certainly be supplying arms to Putin to use against Ukraine as well as continuing to back terrorists around the world and torturing opponents of his regime
My alternative history has Saddam falling victim to the Arab spring, like (eventually) Assad, probably with Libya style Western intervention, only without the complication of ISIS because they were a product of the post Iraq-war Sunni rebellion.
Indeed ISIS have at least fallen back now to just a few pockets of Iraq and Syria
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Iraq set a much higher bar for governments saying "we must do this because WMD, etc". And Iran's nuclear program has already been set back years.
It's a bit more nuanced than that. The bulk of Iran's enrichment capabilites have been destroyed or disrupted. So if Iran wanted to enrich a lot more natural uranium they would struggle to do so.
The problem is that Iran already has a considerable amount of 60% HEU and the effort to turn that into weapons grade uranium at about 90% enrichment is relatively small. A dispersed, small scale enrichment effort could complete that work in quite short order. Israel and the US would have a very short window of opportunity to detect and destroy that final enrichment rush if Iran goes for it.
Basically Israel and the US have probably prevented Iran from producing hundreds of atomic bombs, but haven't quite managed to stop Iran getting very close to producing say a dozen atomic bombs. And in this contest, a few bombs is probably all Iran needs to make the US at least blink.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
In fairness to Biden, Trump 45 also arranged for US forces to leave Afghanistan
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Oh I don’t doubt, but he will still cast a shadow. It’ll be like the Soviet Union after Stalin. Who will deliver the Kruschev speech?
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
The insanity of politicians telling us that diversity is our strength, and warning of people using the problems in the Middle East to stir up trouble by dividing Muslims and Jews is gaslighting of the highest order. The fact we have imported so many people who feel deeply about what is happening in the Middle East and subcontinent is the cause of the divide. Most English people don’t care
I posted this last night, and @foxy replied saying the polling on our involvement in war proves me wrong. I disagree, he misses my point. It’s not military intervention that people don’t care about, it’s the Middle East. If we drew a big line around that part of the world, and the subcontinent, and never mentioned them again, most people wouldn’t care less. It’s due to mass immigration that there are so many with passionate views on the problem that lead to division, so it’s an imported problem that we didn’t need. Most normal English people are happy to let the mad mullahs do what they like as long as they don’t do it here and we are not involved
Diversity is not our strength, it is our Achilles heel
We clearly move in different circles, but I'm encountering more people of diverse political opinions expressing worry over the Middle East than I can remember on any other topic. None of them so far have linked it to immigration - they see it as a global risk. That doesn't include anyone who is noticeably Muslim or Jewish.
I think that, like most people who feel very strongly about one issue, you tend to link everything else to it. Most people are not sure we've got the balance right on immigration, but it's a second-order issue for most.
I’m responding to the PM cautioning against attempts to divide ‘communities’ over the Middle Eastern war. Given that those communities, and therefore the issue he is talking about, only exist thanks to mass immigration, it’s not a stretch to link the two, it’s actually impossible not to.
The Jewish community (which I theoretically belong to) goes back an awfully long way; the Muslim community is mostly more recent, but hardly new. Neither is monolithic on Middle East issues, and some care much more than others. My point, though, is that lots of people who aren't in either are worried by the Middle East situation, and you're mistaken if you think that not having people with Jewish or Arab backgrounds would mean that we would be cheerfully unworried.
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Oh I don’t doubt, but he will still cast a shadow. It’ll be like the Soviet Union after Stalin. Who will deliver the Kruschev speech?
There's no shortage of people denouncing him now, so I don't think that comparison works.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
The insanity of politicians telling us that diversity is our strength, and warning of people using the problems in the Middle East to stir up trouble by dividing Muslims and Jews is gaslighting of the highest order. The fact we have imported so many people who feel deeply about what is happening in the Middle East and subcontinent is the cause of the divide. Most English people don’t care
I posted this last night, and @foxy replied saying the polling on our involvement in war proves me wrong. I disagree, he misses my point. It’s not military intervention that people don’t care about, it’s the Middle East. If we drew a big line around that part of the world, and the subcontinent, and never mentioned them again, most people wouldn’t care less. It’s due to mass immigration that there are so many with passionate views on the problem that lead to division, so it’s an imported problem that we didn’t need. Most normal English people are happy to let the mad mullahs do what they like as long as they don’t do it here and we are not involved
Diversity is not our strength, it is our Achilles heel
We clearly move in different circles, but I'm encountering more people of diverse political opinions expressing worry over the Middle East than I can remember on any other topic. None of them so far have linked it to immigration - they see it as a global risk. That doesn't include anyone who is noticeably Muslim or Jewish.
I think that, like most people who feel very strongly about one issue, you tend to link everything else to it. Most people are not sure we've got the balance right on immigration, but it's a second-order issue for most.
I’m responding to the PM cautioning against attempts to divide ‘communities’ over the Middle Eastern war. Given that those communities, and therefore the issue he is talking about, only exist thanks to mass immigration, it’s not a stretch to link the two, it’s actually impossible not to.
The Jewish community (which I theoretically belong to) goes back an awfully long way; the Muslim community is mostly more recent, but hardly new. Neither is monolithic on Middle East issues, and some care much more than others. My point, though, is that lots of people who aren't in either are worried by the Middle East situation, and you're mistaken if you think that not having people with Jewish or Arab backgrounds would mean that we would be cheerfully unworried.
Most people care about the cost of living. So forget any moral or religious connections, and most people would still care.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
In what way is the destruction of Iran's military capacity a 'much bigger fucking disaster' ?
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
It was the way the West, in particular Britain and France, 'sorted out' the Middle East after WWI that brought about the disaster. Including Balfours Declaration.
I suspect the locals would have found ways to happily fight with and slaughter each other without any outside involvement.
And indeed they did so in Arabia in the Hashemite-Saudi war.
Nor would the Sunni-Shia split have gone away.
Once oil was discovered it became inevitable that outside involvement and internal conflict would increase.
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Oh I don’t doubt, but he will still cast a shadow. It’ll be like the Soviet Union after Stalin. Who will deliver the Kruschev speech?
And the Stalinist Russian Communist party still, I understand, commands support because for it's supporters life was better under Communism. Bit like Reform and at least some Conservatives.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
In fairness to Biden, Trump 45 also arranged for US forces to leave Afghanistan
It was another mess. Trump made a deal direct with the Taliban, over the heads of the US Army, and Biden fluffed the timing say eg Mark Milley.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
They maintained the BBC's independence though, rather than making the newsroom dance to Tory tune
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Oh I don’t doubt, but he will still cast a shadow. It’ll be like the Soviet Union after Stalin. Who will deliver the Kruschev speech?
There's no shortage of people denouncing him now, so I don't think that comparison works.
If you place the Democrat side of US politics as essentially the equivalent of the capitalist West in the Cold War, then it does. It’s just that the Cold War is a cold civil war.
The Kruschev must be a Republican, and one with supreme political power. Ie the POTUS or at least the Republican nominee.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
In what way is the destruction of Iran's military capacity a 'much bigger fucking disaster' ?
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
It was the way the West, in particular Britain and France, 'sorted out' the Middle East after WWI that brought about the disaster. Including Balfours Declaration.
I suspect the locals would have found ways to happily fight with and slaughter each other without any outside involvement.
And indeed they did so in Arabia in the Hashemite-Saudi war.
Nor would the Sunni-Shia split have gone away.
Once oil was discovered it became inevitable that outside involvement and internal conflict would increase.
Fair points. Humans do tend to find reasons to fight each other.
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Without Trump, I am not sure that there is a MAGA agenda, as such.
As the allegations of corruption and sexual transgressions grow, I think at the very least whatever MAGA is would need rebranding.
Looking forward to seeing the Trump family trial though.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
In fairness to Biden, Trump 45 also arranged for US forces to leave Afghanistan
It was another mess. Trump made a deal direct with the Taliban, over the heads of the US Army, and Biden fluffed the timing say eg Mark Milley.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
They maintained the BBC's independence though, rather than making the newsroom dance to Tory tune
If you take the tin foil off your head you may have a clearer view. The BBC tries relentlessly to be balanced to the infuriation of ALL sides.
I think Trump is going to be a Jimmy Savile in legacy. Once he’s off the scene, the sordid, corrupt, bad shit - which was always there, hiding in plain sight, just like Jimmy’s misdeeds - will suddenly be acceptable to talk about and condemn. His reputation will sink with his passing.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
There will still be plenty of voters for his MAGA agenda even without Trump the man leading it
Without Trump, I am not sure that there is a MAGA agenda, as such.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
They maintained the BBC's independence though, rather than making the newsroom dance to Tory tune
If you take the tin foil off your head you may have a clearer view. The BBC tries relentlessly to be balanced to the infuriation of ALL sides.
Trying to be balanced in the current environment takes a heroic level of fortitude and inbuilt natural immunity. Like staying Covid-free at a superspreader event.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
They maintained the BBC's independence though, rather than making the newsroom dance to Tory tune
If you take the tin foil off your head you may have a clearer view. The BBC tries relentlessly to be balanced to the infuriation of ALL sides.
Like feck it does
Mason Kuenssberg Zeffernen
Are a disgrace to journalism
Linda Young Vicky Derbyshire Only few decent ones left
Am I being a bit slow ! Surely the wholesale price would still go up a lot similar to the US .
Indeed it does. But say, as a example, oil prices go up 50% and half the cost of UK fuel is duty and none of the cost in the US is duty then US fuel prices rise 50% and UK prices rise 25%.
Nico - where you might be going wrong is that fuel duty in the UK is, I think, x pence per litre, rather than x% of the retail price. If it were the latter, prices would rise by the same proportion, as you expect. But because the duty per litre is fixed at an absolute, changes to the oil price are muted. I think?
Exactly. Basically, when you buy fuel half is buying the fuel plus VAT and half is fuel duty. It's only the first half that rises and falls with oil prices (not exactly half). In the US taxes are way lower so they pay less but are more exposed to price rises in % terms.
What it means is that UK prices are relatively less volatile, as you way.
The other item I keep mentioning that has not really been bitten on yet is that European use of oil for each person is 1/3 of that of the USA-Canada-Australia. eg the 450 million people in the EU use 10.5m barrels per day, whilst the 350 million people in the USA use 20.5 million bpd. Compared to the UK, USA oil consumption per person is triple.
I don't have enough domain knowledge to weigh the overall consequences, apart from the inevitable ginormous whinging noise, and it all being the Govt's fault.
That means that our 90 day reserves are a lot less per pop than the USA, but is will also have affects on the economic impact.
On this one Canada and Oz are more towards the USA than European end.
The consumption numbers are similar for gas, but with Canada at the top and UK slightly higher than the EU, due to out domestic heating and some of our electricity production.
I'm also interested to see some numbers about what difference our remaining oil fields could make in practice.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
In what way is the destruction of Iran's military capacity a 'much bigger fucking disaster' ?
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
It was the way the West, in particular Britain and France, 'sorted out' the Middle East after WWI that brought about the disaster. Including Balfours Declaration.
I suspect the locals would have found ways to happily fight with and slaughter each other without any outside involvement.
And indeed they did so in Arabia in the Hashemite-Saudi war.
Nor would the Sunni-Shia split have gone away.
Once oil was discovered it became inevitable that outside involvement and internal conflict would increase.
Sure. The Middle East was a war zone, fuelled by slave-raiding, well before Sykes Piquot.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
If they have it has been Far less apparent
Gibb has turned BBC in to GB News lite.
Crucially that applies in the Regions too where a generation of experienced impartial journalists who reported the news and were fair inquisitors have been replaced with a host of Tufton Street robots
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
Don't think any of them were director of comms for a Labour PM and owner of the Muslim News though.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
If they have it has been Far less apparent
Gibb has turned BBC in to GB News lite.
Crucially that applies in the Regions too where a generation of experienced impartial journalists who reported the news and were fair inquisitors have been replaced with a host of Tufton Street robots
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi and his supporters were open about intending to massacre opponents in the East of the country. And, he had carried out numerous acts of war against the UK. Finally the dildo of consequences arrived for him.
I think it was a bayonet of consequence if I recall correctly.
An unpleasant way to go, chosen presumably, because he was a serial rapist.
With the right sense of humour the history of people admiring hideous regimes because of imaginary benefits could make a good comedy.
In my youth, the hard left used to declare that the East Blok was more democratic than democracy (no that’s actually what they said) because they guaranteed full employment and East Germany had free child care.
That the full employment was forced conscription into jobs and the free child care was 2 people looking after 30 babies was ignored.
It goes all the way back to (and beyond) Socrates rich pupils admiring Sparta. Then becoming the Thirty Tyrants.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
Is that 13 year old girl story new?
Aiui (and I have not followed this in detail so may have elided something):
1 - It is an old claim, which has seen media coverage before. 2 - It was mentioned in one of the released documents in the Epstein files, 3 - That document subsequently vanished from the Epstein Files website, which put the spotlight back on it. 4 - There may be some related FBI files which would be expected to be there, but are mysteriously absent.
The place to look for detail may be the In Trump's Head podcast from the daily beast, which is co-hosted by Michael Wolff.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
If they have it has been Far less apparent
Gibb has turned BBC in to GB News lite.
Crucially that applies in the Regions too where a generation of experienced impartial journalists who reported the news and were fair inquisitors have been replaced with a host of Tufton Street robots
You will be pleased to know that BBC Scotland is still the propaganda wing of the Labour Party.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi and his supporters were open about intending to massacre opponents in the East of the country. And, he had carried out numerous acts of war against the UK. Finally the dildo of consequences arrived for him.
I think it was a bayonet of consequence if I recall correctly.
An unpleasant way to go, chosen presumably, because he was a serial rapist.
With the right sense of humour the history of people admiring hideous regimes because of imaginary benefits could make a good comedy.
In my youth, the hard left used to declare that the East Blok was more democratic than democracy (no that’s actually what they said) because they guaranteed full employment and East Germany had free child care.
That the full employment was forced conscription into jobs and the free child care was 2 people looking after 30 babies was ignored.
It goes all the way back to (and beyond) Socrates rich pupils admiring Sparta. Then becoming the Thirty Tyrants.
Unsurprisingly, both Hitler and Stalin (and generations of headmasters), admired Sparta.
A granular description of the many layered corruptions of the Yorks by that fine writer Andrew O'Hagan. So many blind eyes seem to have been turned to their excesses that a short-sighted mole with macular degeneration could have been king-emperor.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
No they were not. The Afghan War removed the Taliban and saw Bin Laden killed, it was withdrawing the troops by Biden that was the disaster and let the Taliban back in power.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
The only Iraqi I know, my dentist, says that overthrowing Saddam was a huge mistake that ruined the country. Sometimes it’s better the devil you know
Not so sure about Sadam
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
Gaddafi and his supporters were open about intending to massacre opponents in the East of the country. And, he had carried out numerous acts of war against the UK. Finally the dildo of consequences arrived for him.
I think it was a bayonet of consequence if I recall correctly.
An unpleasant way to go, chosen presumably, because he was a serial rapist.
With the right sense of humour the history of people admiring hideous regimes because of imaginary benefits could make a good comedy.
In my youth, the hard left used to declare that the East Blok was more democratic than democracy (no that’s actually what they said) because they guaranteed full employment and East Germany had free child care.
That the full employment was forced conscription into jobs and the free child care was 2 people looking after 30 babies was ignored.
It goes all the way back to (and beyond) Socrates rich pupils admiring Sparta. Then becoming the Thirty Tyrants.
Unsurprisingly, both Hitler and Stalin (and generations of headmasters), admired Sparta.
Yeah. And complete ignored the fact that Sparta failed, completely.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
In what way is the destruction of Iran's military capacity a 'much bigger fucking disaster' ?
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
If they have it has been Far less apparent
Gibb has turned BBC in to GB News lite.
Crucially that applies in the Regions too where a generation of experienced impartial journalists who reported the news and were fair inquisitors have been replaced with a host of Tufton Street robots
With the Afghan war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With the Iraq war, it was well planned and long prepared.
It was a fucking disaster.
With this one, it's been done on the spur of the moment because Netanyahu's popularity was tanking and Trump urgently needed a distraction from the Epstein files and the references to forcing a 13-year-old girl to perform oral sex on him. It has not been planned, and it has not been prepared.
It has been a much bigger fucking disaster, and we're only a week in.
The amazing thing is that anyone supports it. It just shows how little attention most people pay to the news.
That is not strictly true. The news narrative from the BBC for example has been Starmer's treason and destruction of the "special relationship" because he egregiously refused Donnie's demands.
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
It's a mistake to believe that the BBC has that sort of influence.There have been a lot of studies about how people form their opinions and the best I read was it's like a bird builds its nest. Little bits are added and when it's put together it's difficult to shift. People are more likely to change their newspaper than change their opinion to that of the newspaper. GB News are preaching to the choir.. That's why advertising is such a tricky business. People won't believe what they don't believe!
Robbie Gibb appointment destroyed BBC as a credible news outlet
Utter bullshit. Do you think other leaders of the BBC have not had political opinions?
If they have it has been Far less apparent
Gibb has turned BBC in to GB News lite.
Crucially that applies in the Regions too where a generation of experienced impartial journalists who reported the news and were fair inquisitors have been replaced with a host of Tufton Street robots
Do you get paid to spout this crap every day?
Do you?
Most of us do it for free, but few are a relentlessly posting on one thing as your good self. I hope you are enjoying it!
Cheltenham 2026 The Biggest Excitement On Earth Today.
Weather, first two days of racing dry, Thursday wet, Friday damp and drying. First 2 days breezy, Thursday Friday windy If you are going, dress for winter not spring, Cheltenham racecourse is exposed to winds and will be much colder than forecasts for the town, particularly the last 2 days.
Going - Selective watering took place on Monday on the good areas of the New course. Some of you have had rain for sixty days and sixty nights, but I suggest from festivals in recent years, pick your bets expecting quicker ground and races. The good side of soft and fast side of good. * Old Course: Soft. * New Course: Good to Soft * Cross Country Course: Good and Soft.
🏇🏻🏇🏻🏇🏻
In the morning of each day, I will give out all winners of the coming afternoons races. 🏇🏻
Today’s Winners are…
13:20 - Talk The Talk 14:00 - Kopek Des Bordes 14:40 - Winston Junior 15:20 - Konfusion {long shot stayer of the day} 16:00 - LOSSIEMOUTH {NAP} and not just out of ❤️ but going and course advantage. 16:40 - Madara 17:20 - BACKMEORSACKME {NAP} course win, distance, jumping, sprint finish.
Those who would like to see the Iranian theocracy overthrown (and it's a laudable aim to a point) are obviously going to be disappointed with Trump's current musings. It seems we have defanged the tiger but the tiger lives and will grow new fangs.
Rather like trying to control immigration or public spending, I've yet to see anyone come up with a coherent scenario for regime change in Iran that doesn't involve American (or someone else's) ground troops or some form of invasion/incursion.
The truth is it's all about the oil and securing the Gulf States - the "freedom of the Iranian people" may be a nice slogan but that's all it is - it's not worth a single American life to free them and if they end up under one dictatorship or another, as long as the oil flows, no one in Washington or frankly anywhere else will care.
It's worth a note that Netanyahu's attack on the leaders killed the new leader's wife, mother, sister and brother-in-law.
'A prison inmate has been charged with the murder of Soham killer Ian Huntley, police have said.
Anthony Russell, 43, will appear at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates' Court via video link on Wednesday, a spokesman for Durham Constabulary said.' Though given Russell is already serving a whole life order not really any sentence they can add further https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8ll4l7d9o
Comments
Otherwise the goldf states would not be cutting production.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-07/kuwait-cuts-oil-and-refining-output-as-hormuz-transits-slow
Those who would like to see the Iranian theocracy overthrown (and it's a laudable aim to a point) are obviously going to be disappointed with Trump's current musings. It seems we have defanged the tiger but the tiger lives and will grow new fangs.
Rather like trying to control immigration or public spending, I've yet to see anyone come up with a coherent scenario for regime change in Iran that doesn't involve American (or someone else's) ground troops or some form of invasion/incursion.
The truth is it's all about the oil and securing the Gulf States - the "freedom of the Iranian people" may be a nice slogan but that's all it is - it's not worth a single American life to free them and if they end up under one dictatorship or another, as long as the oil flows, no one in Washington or frankly anywhere else will care.
Either the money belongs to the clients (it should) and should be taxed as income if received; or it belongs to the solicitors and should be taxed as part of their partnership profits (this would include if it is used as an offset to fees because it is effectively revenue).
I suppose theoretically there is a small loophole (if it is used as an offset then it should be taxed as income for the client and then taxed as revenue for the solicitor) but I’m not sure that the quantum of money involved makes it worth the effort.
But the government shouldn’t be taxing it directly
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/blogs/westminster-update-government-agrees-to-criminal-legal-aid-fee-increase
VAT > goes up
Excise duty > remains flat
Therefore the percentage increase in US gas prices should be higher
The cut is a third of production
https://x.com/watcherguru/status/2031286328915095813?s=46&t=d8CnRhyZJ-m4vy0k55W8XQ
https://x.com/firstsquawk/status/2031274195972411643?s=46&t=d8CnRhyZJ-m4vy0k55W8XQ
The BBC do this because they want the story and a long drawn out, destructive conflict story is a great story. Some viewers still believe BBC News to be reliable, hence their support for war. GeeBeebies and Nick Ferrari on the other hand just follow the aroma of Trump without questioning why and their viewers and listeners fall into line.
The Iraq War removed Saddam and Iraq now elects its own government. This one also killed the Ayatollah and many senior regime leaders and in the first weekend at least was a great success
https://www.lloydslist.com/LL1156563/Shadow-fleet-dominates-Hormuz-crossings-as-Iran-ramps-up-bypass-loadings
Of course what should really happen is clients should get the interest - it is their money and their interest. However, as most client money is swept into a single client account then that is difficult to allocate the interest to the correct client (albeit I dare say virtual account products could make that simple - but not free).
So the money helps fund solicitors either directly (the interest is skimmed off) or the banks offer them a non-interest bearing client account and also something better for their business account (cheaper lending that sort of thing). Either way the solicitors currently get the benefit of, as Father Ted would say “the money just resting in my account.”
In my opinion the solicitors have no leg to stand on in this area. How can an “ethical” profession justify keeping money that is not their’s or screwing over their clients with zero interest in order to benefit themselves? Other than to say that if you take away this revenue (or the advantageous arrangements from the banks to the solicitor firms that ensue) then solicitors will simply put up fees where they can. And is all that and the various belly aching it worth the revenue you can get for legal aid?
https://x.com/ukinuae/status/2031069094611661253
Nominative determinism at its finest!
Removing Gaddafi was a huge unnecessary mistake.
He'd actually built health and education that would put us to shame.
Not defending his excesses but Libya is a basket case now.
And making the link between war and migration.
He is not easy to pin down.
If the Tories want to take on Farage he'd be a very effective Leader and streets ahead of Badenoch.
= 11.7p
I think that, like most people who feel very strongly about one issue, you tend to link everything else to it. Most people are not sure we've got the balance right on immigration, but it's a second-order issue for most.
Or is it any western action in the Middle East is always described as a 'fucking disaster' ?
The problem being that western inaction in the Middle East always ends in a 'fucking disaster' as well.
Perhaps the problem is that it is the Middle East that is the 'fucking disaster'.
And Good Morning one and all!
I was quite interested to listen to Mark Carney's speech to the Australian Parliament last week:
Amongst other things, he recast strategic autonomy as a shared characteristic of a group of trusted democracies.
The earlier part of the video is prep. and introductions, that I was not familiar with for Oz.
https://youtu.be/OkpBJUKNzwo?t=1096
I wonder if more taxes should be collected like that - VAT tends to exacerbate inflation and make government revenues relatively unpredictable, while duties do the opposite.
Private joke
My solicitor cousin eats a lot of chips
Doubtless if we had done, with the consequent slaughter and refugees, then we would have been condemned for causing a 'fucking disaster'.
That’s unless one of the Trump dynasty secures supreme leadership of the US, Mojtaba Khamenei-style.
I use a couple of Irish Tipsters and my own work
Raceolly is a crook from what I've heard, buys other tipster tips and relays them.
What about?
(But not with me, 'cos I'm off to a Zoom lecture on Geology and Medicine in 20 minutes.)
The problem is that Iran already has a considerable amount of 60% HEU and the effort to turn that into weapons grade uranium at about 90% enrichment is relatively small. A dispersed, small scale enrichment effort could complete that work in quite short order. Israel and the US would have a very short window of opportunity to detect and destroy that final enrichment rush if Iran goes for it.
Basically Israel and the US have probably prevented Iran from producing hundreds of atomic bombs, but haven't quite managed to stop Iran getting very close to producing say a dozen atomic bombs. And in this contest, a few bombs is probably all Iran needs to make the US at least blink.
Richard Moffat boss of OLBG is a second home owner neighbour
Gary Priestley an excellent former Twitter now private Tipster lives in Maldon and I see him around and about.
A good friend of Briony Frost is an acquaintance
Pick up some nice snippets
And indeed they did so in Arabia in the Hashemite-Saudi war.
Nor would the Sunni-Shia split have gone away.
Once oil was discovered it became inevitable that outside involvement and internal conflict would increase.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68612367
The Kruschev must be a Republican, and one with supreme political power. Ie the POTUS or at least the Republican nominee.
As the allegations of corruption and sexual transgressions grow, I think at the very least whatever MAGA is would need rebranding.
Looking forward to seeing the Trump family trial though.
Its now clear that there was absolutely no substance behind the Afghan government.
And that the Obama strategy in Afghanistan had been a complete failure.
Though I don't think Obama can really be blamed, the ultimate problem is that the Afghans wanted the Taliban.
Mason
Kuenssberg
Zeffernen
Are a disgrace to journalism
Linda Young
Vicky Derbyshire
Only few decent ones left
The other item I keep mentioning that has not really been bitten on yet is that European use of oil for each person is 1/3 of that of the USA-Canada-Australia. eg the 450 million people in the EU use 10.5m barrels per day, whilst the 350 million people in the USA use 20.5 million bpd. Compared to the UK, USA oil consumption per person is triple.
I don't have enough domain knowledge to weigh the overall consequences, apart from the inevitable ginormous whinging noise, and it all being the Govt's fault.
That means that our 90 day reserves are a lot less per pop than the USA, but is will also have affects on the economic impact.
On this one Canada and Oz are more towards the USA than European end.
The consumption numbers are similar for gas, but with Canada at the top and UK slightly higher than the EU, due to out domestic heating and some of our electricity production.
I'm also interested to see some numbers about what difference our remaining oil fields could make in practice.
Gibb has turned BBC in to GB News lite.
Crucially that applies in the Regions too where a generation of experienced impartial journalists who reported the news and were fair inquisitors have been replaced with a host of Tufton Street robots
In my youth, the hard left used to declare that the East Blok was more democratic than democracy (no that’s actually what they said) because they guaranteed full employment and East Germany had free child care.
That the full employment was forced conscription into jobs and the free child care was 2 people looking after 30 babies was ignored.
It goes all the way back to (and beyond) Socrates rich pupils admiring Sparta. Then becoming the Thirty Tyrants.
Europe needs homegrown, low-carbon energy sources.
Nuclear & renewables together have a key role to play
Nuclear energy is available around the clock, providing electricity all year.
Europe has been a pioneer in nuclear technology.
And can lead again
Today we are presenting a new European strategy for Small Modular Reactors.
Our goal is simple.
We want this new technology to be operational in Europe by the early 2030s.
And to back this we will create a €200M guarantee, to support private investment in innovative nuclear technologies.
1 - It is an old claim, which has seen media coverage before.
2 - It was mentioned in one of the released documents in the Epstein files,
3 - That document subsequently vanished from the Epstein Files website, which put the spotlight back on it.
4 - There may be some related FBI files which would be expected to be there, but are mysteriously absent.
The place to look for detail may be the In Trump's Head podcast from the daily beast, which is co-hosted by Michael Wolff.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v48/n05/andrew-o-hagan/stay-classy
Weather,
first two days of racing dry, Thursday wet, Friday damp and drying.
First 2 days breezy, Thursday Friday windy
If you are going, dress for winter not spring, Cheltenham racecourse is exposed to winds and will be much colder than forecasts for the town, particularly the last 2 days.
Going - Selective watering took place on Monday on the good areas of the New course. Some of you have had rain for sixty days and sixty nights, but I suggest from festivals in recent years, pick your bets expecting quicker ground and races. The good side of soft and fast side of good.
* Old Course: Soft.
* New Course: Good to Soft
* Cross Country Course: Good and Soft.
🏇🏻🏇🏻🏇🏻
In the morning of each day, I will give out all winners of the coming afternoons races. 🏇🏻
Today’s Winners are…
13:20 - Talk The Talk
14:00 - Kopek Des Bordes
14:40 - Winston Junior
15:20 - Konfusion {long shot stayer of the day}
16:00 - LOSSIEMOUTH {NAP} and not just out of ❤️ but going and course advantage.
16:40 - Madara
17:20 - BACKMEORSACKME {NAP} course win, distance, jumping, sprint finish.
There won't be much empathy with Trump.
Anthony Russell, 43, will appear at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates' Court via video link on Wednesday, a spokesman for Durham Constabulary said.' Though given Russell is already serving a whole life order not really any sentence they can add further
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8ll4l7d9o