Even if Truss did open negotiations over Chagos she was there so briefly responsibility for any subsequent actions which followed through on it would have to fall on those that came after, not her.
She cannot be blamed for everything, and even where she started stuff it was on others to sort things out, and failed.
You are forgetting that Keir Starmer, as a Labour PM, has no agency. If a Conservative Government started a negotiation, he had to sign whatever deal was created.
Not to do so, would be to not doff his cap and say "Corblimey, thank you guv'nr".
No agency but wrong reason. Keir Starmer is a lawyer, not a politician, so once an international court decided, it was just a matter of following due process.
Doesn’t explain why Burnham apparently wants to continue with it.
It may come as a surprise to some people but acting according to the law is a thing for both practical and moral reasons.
The Chagos complication for the UK is that Trump has no time for the law and so doing what the US wants, which is ultimately what all UK governments aim to do, becomes very hazy.
Also Chagos is an American base, not a UK one beyond the tiniest fig leaf, and one they will never give up in any circumstances. What the UK wants is nearly irrelevant.
There is absolutely no binding legal reason why the UK needs to do this Chagos nonsense.
There won't be world policeman chasing you for punishment no. But it doesn't mean ignoring judgements against you are necessarily consequence free. Similar to breaking treaties actually of which the UK has a relevant one with Mauritius.
There's some mad idea on this board that UK governments are willfully paying foreign governments because they are irrational and weak minded, when it should be obvious the whole Chagos thing is an embarrassment to them and they are only going along with it with extreme reluctance because they don't think have a choice. Or rather the choice is either to settle with Mauritius or play for time, where playing for time just delays the inevitable.
The reason why UK governments have been going along with it, at least until Trump came along, is because US governments have told their UK counterparts/effective vassals in no uncertain terms to settle with Mauritius, to the extent of referring the UK to tribunals who then ruled against it. USG are telling the UKG to do this is because Diego Garcia is a strategic asset for them and they want to sort out the legals.
Trump is causing trouble of course. On the one hand US policy on Diego Garcia hasn't changed, on the other he sees an opportunity to get at Starmer on what he sees as a weakness, an opportunity he won't let pass. I think UKG could actually say, we're washing our hands of the whole thing, you sort it out with Mauritius. For whatever reason it seems UKG isn't going down that route.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
I always loved the Ken Macleod "Fall Revolution" series, a highly Balkanized world of competing fractions of of splintered states. I think it's The Star Fraction that has some sort of line in reference to the "two thousand, three hundred and ninety-seven flags of the United Nations".
Infantino can get a helluva World Cup out of that.
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
It should be noted though that Farage got 46% of the vote in Clacton at the last general election even as Reform only got 14% nationally. So even if UK voters overall might prefer binface, Farage should still win Clacton comfortably
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
It should be noted though that Farage got 46% of the vote in Clacton at the last general election even as Reform only got 14% nationally. So even if UK voters overall might prefer binface, Farage should still win Clacton comfortably
In the meantime we can at least enjoy the jeopardy.
Don't forget a whopping win against Count Binface and a Fox is no confirmation of innocence over the £5m bung.
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
I had assumed rural crime but the area of Rotherham in question doesn't suggest that. It is mostly run down terraces, the sort of place where houses cost £40k and not £400k.
Even if Truss did open negotiations over Chagos she was there so briefly responsibility for any subsequent actions which followed through on it would have to fall on those that came after, not her.
She cannot be blamed for everything, and even where she started stuff it was on others to sort things out, and failed.
You are forgetting that Keir Starmer, as a Labour PM, has no agency. If a Conservative Government started a negotiation, he had to sign whatever deal was created.
Not to do so, would be to not doff his cap and say "Corblimey, thank you guv'nr".
No agency but wrong reason. Keir Starmer is a lawyer, not a politician, so once an international court decided, it was just a matter of following due process.
Doesn’t explain why Burnham apparently wants to continue with it.
The Foreign Office wants to continue with it. As Moonrabbit astutely observed (though she drew the in my opinion the wrong conclusion) the positive noises about Chagos came after his Foreign Office briefing. Moonrabbit thinks the conclusion is that the Foreign Office are good chaps who want to gracefully bow to the inevitable and help the politicians see that any other course is futile. I think the conclusion is that the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.
I think wiser heads will prevail, and we will not see a re-emergence of Chagos either in this parliament or in Labour's next manifesto.
Thank you Lucky. What we both agree, the idea behind Yes Minister was training manual for politicians, so not to be such suckers that’s used merely as auto pen for what their big office Mandarins want to do. Clearly Burnham is getting briefings, and is getting brainwashed into being that auto pen for Mandarins. Another good example why the WotN is just not up to job of being our PM.
Also, I’m not not saying FO are right on this, I’m not convinced either, but they likely do have some sort of argument, that makes it appear not quite so black and white, that’s not getting much of a hearing.
Getting under the hood why FO love this deal so much they can’t let go, would be interesting.
The claim of 40% down on last year, well we had terrible start to the year with 3 months of solid rain. Also the number is not that far off all over years over the past 5 years (up to this point in the year) and then depending on weather, 2022 ended up with even larger number than 2025, but following trend of 2023 or 2024, still be 30-35k.
It's been in the news a lot less it seems to me.
Well it has really been ticking up over the past 1-2 months (as you would expect with the better weather), but in addition to things like world cup (and all the other sport), the media have had Starmer / Burnham drama, along with Farage locked on in their sights which is sucking up a lot of air time.
Year To Date, and despite perfect boating weather these last couple of months, arrivals are at their lowest since 2021.
I am sure that there isn't a single factor. Fewer arrivals into the Schengen area is part, interdictions by the Bulgarian Police siezing boats, better policing in the Pas de Calais forcing boat launches further away, the "one in one out scheme" and a generally more hostile approach by our government are surely all part of it.
Some way to go, but it is churlish to deny that the governments efforts are working to at least some degree.
It is now rounding errors at same point in the year. We had terrible weather the start of the year. It won't be a surprise if we still hit 30k. The smugglers are also now adapting e.g. big boats. Mahmood has taken some sensible steps, but the issue hasn't gone away.
One in one out is a total failure. 12 a week, nobody thinking of making the crossing is worrying about that.
It's almost as if the much promoted one in one out arrangement is not much more an Elastoplast on a 2 foot gash. Who could possibly have imagined such a thing?
If I understand the system correctly, we are exchanging people who shouldn't be here for people that can be here as they meet the criteria. It seems a perfectly sensible system unless the object is to have no genuine* refugees at all.
* They must be genuine if they have been assessed as such and * We have signed up to an obligation to take genuine refugees.
Please correct me if I have misunderstood some of the comments here which appear, on face value, to be against helping any refugees.
I have repeatedly said the only solution to this is to remove the right to refugee status. That does not mean we take no refugees. It means we take the ones we choose and the rest go back immediately.
Requires a change in the law or walking away from certain conventions. As an advocate, please advise how simple or otherwise this would be.
I think the Cons are going to have to get rid of their (in my view loopy) "Leave the ECHR (Court) and Resile from the ECHR (Conventon)" policy. Is it also "repeal the Human Rights Act"? - I lose track of which groupuscules on the right believe that, and whether it includes the Tories at present
The ECHR is a plank of the Rules Based Order, and an important part of Churchill's legacy. Even now, I think Tories still - when the red mist has not descended - believe in the rule of international law.
The proposal resembles the Chinese method of roasting a pig by burning the house down.
It's too much of a downside for a bit of tweaking around transgender questions, immigration questions to which it will probably make little difference, and a few others bits and pieces. The downside is that it will undermine elderly people, disabled people, and pregnant woman - of who number in the tens of millions.
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
I had assumed rural crime but the area of Rotherham in question doesn't suggest that. It is mostly run down terraces, the sort of place where houses cost £40k and not £400k.
All very odd.
It's looking more and more like an Antifa conspiracy against the good and the righteous. Lucky Nigel got that £5m for his own close protection detail.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
I had assumed rural crime but the area of Rotherham in question doesn't suggest that. It is mostly run down terraces, the sort of place where houses cost £40k and not £400k.
All very odd.
It's looking more and more like an Antifa conspiracy against the good and the righteous. Lucky Nigel got that £5m for his own close protection detail.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
I'm sure I've read comments on here saying that Mr Trump will not allow the next election to take place.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
Even if Truss did open negotiations over Chagos she was there so briefly responsibility for any subsequent actions which followed through on it would have to fall on those that came after, not her.
She cannot be blamed for everything, and even where she started stuff it was on others to sort things out, and failed.
You are forgetting that Keir Starmer, as a Labour PM, has no agency. If a Conservative Government started a negotiation, he had to sign whatever deal was created.
Not to do so, would be to not doff his cap and say "Corblimey, thank you guv'nr".
No agency but wrong reason. Keir Starmer is a lawyer, not a politician, so once an international court decided, it was just a matter of following due process.
Doesn’t explain why Burnham apparently wants to continue with it.
The Foreign Office wants to continue with it. As Moonrabbit astutely observed (though she drew the in my opinion the wrong conclusion) the positive noises about Chagos came after his Foreign Office briefing. Moonrabbit thinks the conclusion is that the Foreign Office are good chaps who want to gracefully bow to the inevitable and help the politicians see that any other course is futile. I think the conclusion is that the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.
I think wiser heads will prevail, and we will not see a re-emergence of Chagos either in this parliament or in Labour's next manifesto.
Thank you Lucky. What we both agree, the idea behind Yes Minister was training manual for politicians, so not to be such suckers that’s used merely as auto pen for what their big office Mandarins want to do. Clearly Burnham is getting briefings, and is getting brainwashed into being that auto pen for Mandarins. Another good example why the WotN is just not up to job of being our PM.
Also, I’m not not saying FO are right on this, I’m not convinced either, but they likely do have some sort of argument, that makes it appear not quite so black and white, that’s not getting much of a hearing.
Getting under the hood why FO love this deal so much they can’t let go, would be interesting.
The bit I’m confident is weak part of your understanding, that’s very key to this: Maritious in bed with China. Imo everyone saying “Maritious in bed with China” over and over have brainwashed themselves, believing something not true. Don’t take my word for it, or the AI slop out there, bit of proper research for yourself and it becomes clear that Mauritius are firmly in bed on military and security with India, who they are quite close to culturally and ethnically too due to historical migration. Mauritius fancy themselves as “East Coast Singapore” as the Chatham House articles call it - trade deals they have signed with everybody and those with China are doing too much heavy lifting for the “totally in bed with China” spin line. So what else have you got that proves totally in bed with China? Security and military deals that outstrip those they have with India? Trade deals not enough proof alone, after all UK have sexier trade deals with China - does it put us in bed with China?
Well. Okay. yes. There is that discussion under Blair, brown, Cam, Ossie, May, Boris, perhaps we did we get too far in bed with China on business, an we have been played on security.
Your conclusion that “the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.” Ties in with Barty in the post just before yours “There is absolutely no binding legal reason why the UK needs to do this Chagos nonsense.” I’m not saying either point are wrong. But why are FO are so in bed with this idea as sensible in their view.
Maybe the malign influence of India. India want Mauritius to legally have Chagos. Barty is right, they can’t force it legally, but they can apply other forms of strong pressure on UK, in the economic and security spheres we need in the region, that UK are not getting due to India’s influence. So the foreign office is working on a balance what is now worse for UK - accommodation with India and Mauritius legal right on Chagos for all that UK security and trade damage turned off, or keep the status quo, this comes with that trade and security damage for UK from India’s influence in the region, still switched on.
I havn’t sexed it up to be like something from “the great game” - it very much is from a Great Game. And the FO are the pro ballers in that game on behalf of the British People. Where deals with influential power brokers to further your trade and security, never come so black and white as this Chagos one is always being presented in UK media.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
Surely the Pope would have an unfair advantage. He could scout players across the Priesthood around the world and transfer them to the Holy See.
As a side note, England is the only country with a clear Protestant majority to win the World Cup. All others have gone to majority Catholic countries, with Germany being more or less half and half. There is an interesting (but not convincing case) that the rise of Evangelical Protestantism in Brazil is responsible for the decline in their football.
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
I had assumed rural crime but the area of Rotherham in question doesn't suggest that. It is mostly run down terraces, the sort of place where houses cost £40k and not £400k.
All very odd.
It's looking more and more like an Antifa conspiracy against the good and the righteous. Lucky Nigel got that £5m for his own close protection detail.
Or none of the above, just a weapons grade nutter.
The nutter part is a given, I think, but the idea that someone living in a crappy part of Rotherham would either know or care where Widdecombe lived is seriously odd.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
The problem with a team of priests is finding the one who scores.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
Wales will still struggle to qualify.
P.S. I am still reeling from the three Gabriel Clarke interviews yesterday. (My precis)
Clarke " England were shite tonight weren't they?"
Tuchel " We could have done better".
Clarke to Bellingham "Tuchel says you were shite!"
Clarke to Kane " Tuchel says you were all a load of shite!"
Not how I recall it. Tuchel was the one who thought we were lucky, and didn’t do what Hexham asked them to do. Clarke r then got it wrong about mentality, which is the only thing Tuchel thought we had got right.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
The problem with a team of priests is finding the one who scores.
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
I haven't watched more than a couple of minutes of tennis for 4 or 5 years. I was very keen when I was younger but at some point over the last 20 years tennis has just lost me. It was far too much about power, not nearly enough about touch or tactics. It just got boring. Mens tennis was the worst but with the Williams sisters women's tennis went the same way. I honestly believe modern rackets have destroyed the game as a spectacle. They still seem to get enough attention so I don't suppose they give a damn what I think but I suspect I am far from alone.
Gianni Infantino has said FIFA will examine expanding the World Cup by a further 16 nations to a 64-team tournament ahead of its next edition in 2030. The 2030 tournament will be spread across six nations and three continents: Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay are scheduled to host one match apiece at the start of the competition, with the remaining games split between Morocco, Portugal and Spain.
Might as well not bother with qualifiers. Just has a small qualifer tournament for weakest nations and the rest automatically get invited, bit like the cricket.
If its going to be more than 32, then 64 is the next best number, better than 48.
It should be a binary scale number, 64 is one just like 32.
Looking forward to the 128 team world cup.
Then we'll need to start creating more countries to get to the 256 team world cup.
FIFA currently has 211 members, so only need another 45. Vatican City doesn't have a squad. Bougainville will be an independent nation soon(ish). New Caledonia could be too and probably should have their own team anyway, as should French Guiana. I support Western Sahara's independence struggle.
There, that's 5. 40 left.
Loving the idea of the Pope as keeper in the Vatican squad, leaning on the post. "Jesus saves..."
I’ve seen how priests play, on a documentary from Ireland.
I haven't watched more than a couple of minutes of tennis for 4 or 5 years. I was very keen when I was younger but at some point over the last 20 years tennis has just lost me. It was far too much about power, not nearly enough about touch or tactics. It just got boring. Mens tennis was the worst but with the Williams sisters women's tennis went the same way. I honestly believe modern rackets have destroyed the game as a spectacle. They still seem to get enough attention so I don't suppose they give a damn what I think but I suspect I am far from alone.
Indeed you are not alone. I commented to my wife a paraphrase of your post ten minutes ago
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
I had assumed rural crime but the area of Rotherham in question doesn't suggest that. It is mostly run down terraces, the sort of place where houses cost £40k and not £400k.
All very odd.
It's looking more and more like an Antifa conspiracy against the good and the righteous. Lucky Nigel got that £5m for his own close protection detail.
Or none of the above, just a weapons grade nutter.
The nutter part is a given, I think, but the idea that someone living in a crappy part of Rotherham would either know or care where Widdecombe lived is seriously odd.
See what we think of as political is high minded stuff like Brexit, liberal identity politics and the stuff we debate on here week by week.
If this is political it is as likely to be "they cut off some of my benefits (and from the description, this might be the sort of person who could legitimately end up persistently on benefits), Widdecombe spoke harshly about it on TV that morning." The politics of everyday living and personal circumstance rather than higher ideology..
Even if Truss did open negotiations over Chagos she was there so briefly responsibility for any subsequent actions which followed through on it would have to fall on those that came after, not her.
She cannot be blamed for everything, and even where she started stuff it was on others to sort things out, and failed.
You are forgetting that Keir Starmer, as a Labour PM, has no agency. If a Conservative Government started a negotiation, he had to sign whatever deal was created.
Not to do so, would be to not doff his cap and say "Corblimey, thank you guv'nr".
No agency but wrong reason. Keir Starmer is a lawyer, not a politician, so once an international court decided, it was just a matter of following due process.
Doesn’t explain why Burnham apparently wants to continue with it.
The Foreign Office wants to continue with it. As Moonrabbit astutely observed (though she drew the in my opinion the wrong conclusion) the positive noises about Chagos came after his Foreign Office briefing. Moonrabbit thinks the conclusion is that the Foreign Office are good chaps who want to gracefully bow to the inevitable and help the politicians see that any other course is futile. I think the conclusion is that the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.
I think wiser heads will prevail, and we will not see a re-emergence of Chagos either in this parliament or in Labour's next manifesto.
Thank you Lucky. What we both agree, the idea behind Yes Minister was training manual for politicians, so not to be such suckers that’s used merely as auto pen for what their big office Mandarins want to do. Clearly Burnham is getting briefings, and is getting brainwashed into being that auto pen for Mandarins. Another good example why the WotN is just not up to job of being our PM.
Also, I’m not not saying FO are right on this, I’m not convinced either, but they likely do have some sort of argument, that makes it appear not quite so black and white, that’s not getting much of a hearing.
Getting under the hood why FO love this deal so much they can’t let go, would be interesting.
The bit I’m confident is weak part of your understanding, that’s very key to this: Maritious in bed with China. Imo everyone saying “Maritious in bed with China” over and over have brainwashed themselves, believing something not true. Don’t take my word for it, or the AI slop out there, bit of proper research for yourself and it becomes clear that Mauritius are firmly in bed on military and security with India, who they are quite close to culturally and ethnically too due to historical migration. Mauritius fancy themselves as “East Coast Singapore” as the Chatham House articles call it - trade deals they have signed with everybody and those with China are doing too much heavy lifting for the “totally in bed with China” spin line. So what else have you got that proves totally in bed with China? Security and military deals that outstrip those they have with India? Trade deals not enough proof alone, after all UK have sexier trade deals with China - does it put us in bed with China?
Well. Okay. yes. There is that discussion under Blair, brown, Cam, Ossie, May, Boris, perhaps we did we get too far in bed with China on business, an we have been played on security.
Your conclusion that “the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.” Ties in with Barty in the post just before yours “There is absolutely no binding legal reason why the UK needs to do this Chagos nonsense.” I’m not saying either point are wrong. But why are FO are so in bed with this idea as sensible in their view.
Maybe the malign influence of India. India want Mauritius to legally have Chagos. Barty is right, they can’t force it legally, but they can apply other forms of strong pressure on UK, in the economic and security spheres we need in the region, that UK are not getting due to India’s influence. So the foreign office is working on a balance what is now worse for UK - accommodation with India and Mauritius legal right on Chagos for all that UK security and trade damage turned off, or keep the status quo, this comes with that trade and security damage for UK from India’s influence in the region, still switched on.
I havn’t sexed it up to be like something from “the great game” - it very much is from a Great Game. And the FO are the pro ballers in that game on behalf of the British People. Where deals with influential power brokers to further your trade and security, never come so black and white as this Chagos one is always being presented in UK media.
I would sell it to the USA and use some of the money to buy off the Chagossians, who have certainly been badly treated but won't be any better treated under any possible other outcome.
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
Even if Truss did open negotiations over Chagos she was there so briefly responsibility for any subsequent actions which followed through on it would have to fall on those that came after, not her.
She cannot be blamed for everything, and even where she started stuff it was on others to sort things out, and failed.
You are forgetting that Keir Starmer, as a Labour PM, has no agency. If a Conservative Government started a negotiation, he had to sign whatever deal was created.
Not to do so, would be to not doff his cap and say "Corblimey, thank you guv'nr".
No agency but wrong reason. Keir Starmer is a lawyer, not a politician, so once an international court decided, it was just a matter of following due process.
Doesn’t explain why Burnham apparently wants to continue with it.
The Foreign Office wants to continue with it. As Moonrabbit astutely observed (though she drew the in my opinion the wrong conclusion) the positive noises about Chagos came after his Foreign Office briefing. Moonrabbit thinks the conclusion is that the Foreign Office are good chaps who want to gracefully bow to the inevitable and help the politicians see that any other course is futile. I think the conclusion is that the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.
I think wiser heads will prevail, and we will not see a re-emergence of Chagos either in this parliament or in Labour's next manifesto.
Thank you Lucky. What we both agree, the idea behind Yes Minister was training manual for politicians, so not to be such suckers that’s used merely as auto pen for what their big office Mandarins want to do. Clearly Burnham is getting briefings, and is getting brainwashed into being that auto pen for Mandarins. Another good example why the WotN is just not up to job of being our PM.
Also, I’m not not saying FO are right on this, I’m not convinced either, but they likely do have some sort of argument, that makes it appear not quite so black and white, that’s not getting much of a hearing.
Getting under the hood why FO love this deal so much they can’t let go, would be interesting.
The bit I’m confident is weak part of your understanding, that’s very key to this: Maritious in bed with China. Imo everyone saying “Maritious in bed with China” over and over have brainwashed themselves, believing something not true. Don’t take my word for it, or the AI slop out there, bit of proper research for yourself and it becomes clear that Mauritius are firmly in bed on military and security with India, who they are quite close to culturally and ethnically too due to historical migration. Mauritius fancy themselves as “East Coast Singapore” as the Chatham House articles call it - trade deals they have signed with everybody and those with China are doing too much heavy lifting for the “totally in bed with China” spin line. So what else have you got that proves totally in bed with China? Security and military deals that outstrip those they have with India? Trade deals not enough proof alone, after all UK have sexier trade deals with China - does it put us in bed with China?
Well. Okay. yes. There is that discussion under Blair, brown, Cam, Ossie, May, Boris, perhaps we did we get too far in bed with China on business, an we have been played on security.
Your conclusion that “the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.” Ties in with Barty in the post just before yours “There is absolutely no binding legal reason why the UK needs to do this Chagos nonsense.” I’m not saying either point are wrong. But why are FO are so in bed with this idea as sensible in their view.
Maybe the malign influence of India. India want Mauritius to legally have Chagos. Barty is right, they can’t force it legally, but they can apply other forms of strong pressure on UK, in the economic and security spheres we need in the region, that UK are not getting due to India’s influence. So the foreign office is working on a balance what is now worse for UK - accommodation with India and Mauritius legal right on Chagos for all that UK security and trade damage turned off, or keep the status quo, this comes with that trade and security damage for UK from India’s influence in the region, still switched on.
I havn’t sexed it up to be like something from “the great game” - it very much is from a Great Game. And the FO are the pro ballers in that game on behalf of the British People. Where deals with influential power brokers to further your trade and security, never come so black and white as this Chagos one is always being presented in UK media.
The big problem with giving Chagos to Mauritius is that it breaks Article 1(2) of the UN Charter.
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
I haven't watched more than a couple of minutes of tennis for 4 or 5 years. I was very keen when I was younger but at some point over the last 20 years tennis has just lost me. It was far too much about power, not nearly enough about touch or tactics. It just got boring. Mens tennis was the worst but with the Williams sisters women's tennis went the same way. I honestly believe modern rackets have destroyed the game as a spectacle. They still seem to get enough attention so I don't suppose they give a damn what I think but I suspect I am far from alone.
Indeed you are not alone. I commented to my wife a paraphrase of your post ten minutes ago
A 6 foot 6 inch German hitting 139 mph serves is a fearsome, if uninteresting sight certainly..🧐
Even if Truss did open negotiations over Chagos she was there so briefly responsibility for any subsequent actions which followed through on it would have to fall on those that came after, not her.
She cannot be blamed for everything, and even where she started stuff it was on others to sort things out, and failed.
You are forgetting that Keir Starmer, as a Labour PM, has no agency. If a Conservative Government started a negotiation, he had to sign whatever deal was created.
Not to do so, would be to not doff his cap and say "Corblimey, thank you guv'nr".
No agency but wrong reason. Keir Starmer is a lawyer, not a politician, so once an international court decided, it was just a matter of following due process.
Doesn’t explain why Burnham apparently wants to continue with it.
The Foreign Office wants to continue with it. As Moonrabbit astutely observed (though she drew the in my opinion the wrong conclusion) the positive noises about Chagos came after his Foreign Office briefing. Moonrabbit thinks the conclusion is that the Foreign Office are good chaps who want to gracefully bow to the inevitable and help the politicians see that any other course is futile. I think the conclusion is that the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.
I think wiser heads will prevail, and we will not see a re-emergence of Chagos either in this parliament or in Labour's next manifesto.
Thank you Lucky. What we both agree, the idea behind Yes Minister was training manual for politicians, so not to be such suckers that’s used merely as auto pen for what their big office Mandarins want to do. Clearly Burnham is getting briefings, and is getting brainwashed into being that auto pen for Mandarins. Another good example why the WotN is just not up to job of being our PM.
Also, I’m not not saying FO are right on this, I’m not convinced either, but they likely do have some sort of argument, that makes it appear not quite so black and white, that’s not getting much of a hearing.
Getting under the hood why FO love this deal so much they can’t let go, would be interesting.
The bit I’m confident is weak part of your understanding, that’s very key to this: Maritious in bed with China. Imo everyone saying “Maritious in bed with China” over and over have brainwashed themselves, believing something not true. Don’t take my word for it, or the AI slop out there, bit of proper research for yourself and it becomes clear that Mauritius are firmly in bed on military and security with India, who they are quite close to culturally and ethnically too due to historical migration. Mauritius fancy themselves as “East Coast Singapore” as the Chatham House articles call it - trade deals they have signed with everybody and those with China are doing too much heavy lifting for the “totally in bed with China” spin line. So what else have you got that proves totally in bed with China? Security and military deals that outstrip those they have with India? Trade deals not enough proof alone, after all UK have sexier trade deals with China - does it put us in bed with China?
Well. Okay. yes. There is that discussion under Blair, brown, Cam, Ossie, May, Boris, perhaps we did we get too far in bed with China on business, an we have been played on security.
Your conclusion that “the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.” Ties in with Barty in the post just before yours “There is absolutely no binding legal reason why the UK needs to do this Chagos nonsense.” I’m not saying either point are wrong. But why are FO are so in bed with this idea as sensible in their view.
Maybe the malign influence of India. India want Mauritius to legally have Chagos. Barty is right, they can’t force it legally, but they can apply other forms of strong pressure on UK, in the economic and security spheres we need in the region, that UK are not getting due to India’s influence. So the foreign office is working on a balance what is now worse for UK - accommodation with India and Mauritius legal right on Chagos for all that UK security and trade damage turned off, or keep the status quo, this comes with that trade and security damage for UK from India’s influence in the region, still switched on.
I havn’t sexed it up to be like something from “the great game” - it very much is from a Great Game. And the FO are the pro ballers in that game on behalf of the British People. Where deals with influential power brokers to further your trade and security, never come so black and white as this Chagos one is always being presented in UK media.
The big problem with giving Chagos to Mauritius is that it breaks Article 1(2) of the UN Charter.
And I don't see why it is OK for Mauritius to be the colonial power, but not the UK.
It is not as if Mauritius is a former great nation which unjustly had its land and people taken away by European powers, it is itself a product of British and French colonialism.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
I'm sure I've read comments on here saying that Mr Trump will not allow the next election to take place.
Yes, and he will declare martial law in Democrat states after the mid terms, which won’t be going ahead anyway according to comments here
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Even if it is not DJ Trump, his Beavis or Butthead offspring could take on the mantle. Assuming Stephen Miller remains in control, the MAGA project continues.
One set all in the Wimbledon final, Jannick Sinner v. Alexander Zverev.
I know you spend much of your life on British trains and thus think that the populace is entirely cut off from anything resembling news, but the "Sunil News" channel is going to have to do some work to get really popular.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
I'm sure I've read comments on here saying that Mr Trump will not allow the next election to take place.
Yes, and he will declare martial law in Democrat states after the mid terms, which won’t be going ahead anyway according to comments here
We might have a better idea of what comes next this November.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The best approach would be to wipe all comments and just let us start again. Jacques Derrida wrote that writing is inherently unstable and the original meaning begins to decay as soon as the words are formed. Therefore written forms thought only survive through continuous restatement and reinterpretation.
Also, consider the short story La biblioteca de Babel in Jorge Luis Borge's El jardín de senderos que se bifurcan on the futility of preservation.
Or conversely, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
So @rcs1000 , @TSE, can you tell me the date past which such things can't be accessed, and I'll go to town on archive.is
Don't worry, there is no chance I will take @Dura_Ace's advice on anything beyond cycling.
And Polish brothels. Though you may have your own expertise in this area of course.
Surely there is only One True Expert on brothels on PB?
Was the infamous threesome in a brothel or elsewhere ?
The PBer who had a threesome and the PBer who got a prostitute pregnant and wrote about it, and the PBer who visited a brothel are three different people. Although 1,2 and 3 have also all visited brothels, they were different brothels and the details are different: one went to a higher class brothel, another went to a lower class brothel, and another went to the kind of brothel which the police need guns to break into. One went alone, another went with a lady friend, a third went with many male friends/colleagues. I found all the anecdotes rather sad, although I assume they liked it. The views of the prostitutes were not recorded except for the obvious case.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
Would we be entirely surprised if the ultimate source of some or all of these donations turns out to be Russian?
Latest on Reform sleaze:
* British security services believe Russia and other bad actors have been attempting to penetrate Reform and UKIP for over a decade * They believe Nathan Gill was not the only Russian Reform target * Montenegro is of particular concern to UK agencies
I think 'the establishment' have gone off a bit soon on this one. They always seem to do this - pile in so it all gets lost in what appears to be a tidal wave of witch hunt. Farage has chosen the battleground (Clacton) and the other parties have chosen (by default) Binface to go up against him - a very weak choice given that he is a made up character and cannot be an MP.
If Farage wins a powerful byelection victory, that makes it very hard for a parliamentary commitee to send him back to face another one. I can see why those who are against Reform want to do this now to finish him off, but these additional allegations, especially the intelligence services weighing in (we have already had the police), are somewhat feeding the narrative. It also serves Farage to have it all out now, because if it's all out now, not only can he claim the voters of Clacton knew it all and still want him as their MP, it also means there's nothing left for any fresh interventions between now and the next election. It feels a bit like Napoleon sending in the Old Guard at Waterloo.
Good morning
'If Farage wins a powerful by election victory, that makes it very hard for a parliamentary committee to send him back to face another one'
This is an election to try to stop a legitimate investigation into Farage and his funding, and it most certainly will not stop the standards investigation reconvening if he wins, no matter the size of the result and nor should it
Why does Farage expect to be held to lesser standards than other mps, and if he has nothing to hide why on earth start this charade ?
I am not saying that he has nothing to hide. I think Farage would argue that the current scrutiny of Reform is well beyond the scrutiny applied to other parties.
No, it isn't.
The level of scrutiny relates to behaviour.
When the Conservative Party recently received an ineligible donation - from a bank in the UK, but one that was incorporated in Germany and didn't have a UK Ltd - they returned the money immediately, after informing the Electoral Commission and doing the required anti-money laundering checks on the money.
If they had received 5 million and not declared it, then they would be getting banner headlines.
Reform did not receive 5 million and fail to declare it. Afaicr, Farage received 5 million before he re-entered the political fray, and failed to declare it retrospectively. Let us try to be accurate.
I remember very little (no) scrutiny when Sunak acted to enrich Moderna, a company he was absolutely aware his own investment portfolio had significant shares in. The big parties know how to play the game and keep things within the letter of the rules, but somehow, palms end up being thoroughly greased, and the taxpayer keeps picking up the tab. I don't know whether Reform will be better, but I certainly don't think they'll be worse.
"I remember very little (no) scrutiny when Sunak acted to enrich Moderna, a company he was absolutely aware his own investment portfolio had significant shares in."
I don't think that statement holds up to much scrutiny.
Firstly, it was the hedge fund that Sunak co-founded (Theleme) that held the shares, and not Sunak himself. Now Sunak left Theleme back in 2013, and he has stated that he has no financial interest in any fund managed by Theleme. It is *possible* that he owns shares in Theleme himself, but you're now talking about two degrees of separation.
Secondly, do you think it would have been better if the UK government had said "fuck it, we don't want those stinking Covid vaccines, because there is the possibility that people might think that there was a conflict?" Did we pay more for Moderna covid vaccines than, say, the US? If not, it's really hard to argue there was a real conflict.
I'm afraid this post exemplifies exactly the fobbing off and beggaring of belief that I describe. Sunak may have left Theleme in 2013, but he did not make his investment trust 'blind' until 2019. He made decisions benefitting Moderna as early as 2020 and 2021 as Chancellor, and continued to so so when he became PM. It seems highly implausible that the blind trust would have divested itself of Moderna shares in so short a time, and Sunak's refusal to reveal the make up of the portfolio before it went blind speaks volumes. But apparently that's all fine and we should stick to looking at Farage's grubby donations, rather than Sunak's 'I've ticked all the boxes' self-enrichment.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
As I recall he left kicking and screaming only after an attempt at sedition.
One set all in the Wimbledon final, Jannick Sinner v. Alexander Zverev.
I know you spend much of your life on British trains and thus think that the populace is entirely cut off from anything resembling news, but the "Sunil News" channel is going to have to do some work to get really popular.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
One set all in the Wimbledon final, Jannick Sinner v. Alexander Zverev.
I know you spend much of your life on British trains and thus think that the populace is entirely cut off from anything resembling news, but the "Sunil News" channel is going to have to do some work to get really popular.
Sunil on Sunday.
Am I imagining things, but perhaps you used to make posts 'Sunil on Sunday' ? You definitely did do some railway travelogues which were first class.
Anyway, telling us stuff we already know is far from the heights.
Yet another person that Farage has fallen out with to the point of bitter vendetta. It is all part of a pattern.
Mr Carswell has been off the UK scene for a good while. Do the other parties in these supposed vendettas actually engage in vendetta-like behaviour or is it all on Mr Farage's side?
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Only reluctantly, like a spoilt child.
Maybe so, but he did.
And this time he might not.
Past performance doesn't guarantee future performance, but it's the best we have.
One set all in the Wimbledon final, Jannick Sinner v. Alexander Zverev.
I know you spend much of your life on British trains and thus think that the populace is entirely cut off from anything resembling news, but the "Sunil News" channel is going to have to do some work to get really popular.
Sunil on Sunday.
Am I imagining things, but perhaps you used to make posts 'Sunil on Sunday' ? You definitely did do some railway travelogues which were first class.
Anyway, telling us stuff we already know is far from the heights.
Oh and perhaps the think calmer tombstone could be whipped out for old times sake. How we slightly laughed!
Edit: (I have been here many years, I'm still working on a worthwhile comment)
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
It's hardly the wildest thing to believe given what we've see so far.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Only reluctantly, like a spoilt child.
Maybe so, but he did.
I can't help but think you are wilfully misunderstanding Hunter Biden's point "I believe in an America after Trump".
Obviously, Biden is not casting doubt on whether or when Trump will eventually go (Trump is mortal after all) and he's not even specifying a date; what he's saying is America after Trump can be worth believing in.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
I personally thought that a cynical error sold as pragmatism. However comparing it to an attempted coup and demanding faux votes from the Governor of Georgia is a nonsense.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
They will happen, but free and fair remains to be seen.
There's a significant breeze now so I've opened my front & back doors. The wind is stirring the windchime hanging from the hall ceiling. Quite a deep-toned one - it's ages since I heard it and it sounds lovely.
Would we be entirely surprised if the ultimate source of some or all of these donations turns out to be Russian?
Latest on Reform sleaze:
* British security services believe Russia and other bad actors have been attempting to penetrate Reform and UKIP for over a decade * They believe Nathan Gill was not the only Russian Reform target * Montenegro is of particular concern to UK agencies
I think 'the establishment' have gone off a bit soon on this one. They always seem to do this - pile in so it all gets lost in what appears to be a tidal wave of witch hunt. Farage has chosen the battleground (Clacton) and the other parties have chosen (by default) Binface to go up against him - a very weak choice given that he is a made up character and cannot be an MP.
If Farage wins a powerful byelection victory, that makes it very hard for a parliamentary commitee to send him back to face another one. I can see why those who are against Reform want to do this now to finish him off, but these additional allegations, especially the intelligence services weighing in (we have already had the police), are somewhat feeding the narrative. It also serves Farage to have it all out now, because if it's all out now, not only can he claim the voters of Clacton knew it all and still want him as their MP, it also means there's nothing left for any fresh interventions between now and the next election. It feels a bit like Napoleon sending in the Old Guard at Waterloo.
Good morning
'If Farage wins a powerful by election victory, that makes it very hard for a parliamentary committee to send him back to face another one'
This is an election to try to stop a legitimate investigation into Farage and his funding, and it most certainly will not stop the standards investigation reconvening if he wins, no matter the size of the result and nor should it
Why does Farage expect to be held to lesser standards than other mps, and if he has nothing to hide why on earth start this charade ?
I am not saying that he has nothing to hide. I think Farage would argue that the current scrutiny of Reform is well beyond the scrutiny applied to other parties.
No, it isn't.
The level of scrutiny relates to behaviour.
When the Conservative Party recently received an ineligible donation - from a bank in the UK, but one that was incorporated in Germany and didn't have a UK Ltd - they returned the money immediately, after informing the Electoral Commission and doing the required anti-money laundering checks on the money.
If they had received 5 million and not declared it, then they would be getting banner headlines.
Reform did not receive 5 million and fail to declare it. Afaicr, Farage received 5 million before he re-entered the political fray, and failed to declare it retrospectively. Let us try to be accurate.
I remember very little (no) scrutiny when Sunak acted to enrich Moderna, a company he was absolutely aware his own investment portfolio had significant shares in. The big parties know how to play the game and keep things within the letter of the rules, but somehow, palms end up being thoroughly greased, and the taxpayer keeps picking up the tab. I don't know whether Reform will be better, but I certainly don't think they'll be worse.
"I remember very little (no) scrutiny when Sunak acted to enrich Moderna, a company he was absolutely aware his own investment portfolio had significant shares in."
I don't think that statement holds up to much scrutiny.
Firstly, it was the hedge fund that Sunak co-founded (Theleme) that held the shares, and not Sunak himself. Now Sunak left Theleme back in 2013, and he has stated that he has no financial interest in any fund managed by Theleme. It is *possible* that he owns shares in Theleme himself, but you're now talking about two degrees of separation.
Secondly, do you think it would have been better if the UK government had said "fuck it, we don't want those stinking Covid vaccines, because there is the possibility that people might think that there was a conflict?" Did we pay more for Moderna covid vaccines than, say, the US? If not, it's really hard to argue there was a real conflict.
I'm afraid this post exemplifies exactly the fobbing off and beggaring of belief that I describe. Sunak may have left Theleme in 2013, but he did not make his investment trust 'blind' until 2019. He made decisions benefitting Moderna as early as 2020 and 2021 as Chancellor, and continued to so so when he became PM. It seems highly implausible that the blind trust would have divested itself of Moderna shares in so short a time, and Sunak's refusal to reveal the make up of the portfolio before it went blind speaks volumes. But apparently that's all fine and we should stick to looking at Farage's grubby donations, rather than Sunak's 'I've ticked all the boxes' self-enrichment.
As for whether the UK should have been buying vaccines from Moderna during covid - almost certainly yes. But I don't really see the reason for the 10-year deal with Moderna that came in 2 months after Sunak took office.
Yet another person that Farage has fallen out with to the point of bitter vendetta. It is all part of a pattern.
Mr Carswell has been off the UK scene for a good while. Do the other parties in these supposed vendettas actually engage in vendetta-like behaviour or is it all on Mr Farage's side?
Surely that's the wrong way round. Farage falls out with people and those people launch vendettas against him. It's not to Farage's credit that this happens frequently.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
I personally thought that a cynical error sold as pragmatism. However comparing it to an attempted coup and demanding faux votes from the Governor of Georgia is a nonsense.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
I personally thought that a cynical error sold as pragmatism. However comparing it to an attempted coup and demanding faux votes from the Governor of Georgia is a nonsense.
Did you miss the bit where Starmer tried to get the armed wing of the Fabian Society into the Commons to lynch David Lammy?
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
I personally thought that a cynical error sold as pragmatism. However comparing it to an attempted coup and demanding faux votes from the Governor of Georgia is a nonsense.
If I’d done that you’d have a point
I didn’t
I compared it to people claiming that this years mid terms would be canned.
The Widdecombe murder suddenly has got weird again.
A man suspected of murdering Ann Widdecombe is believed to have driven nearly 300 miles to her Dartmoor home with a “wooden stick” on the morning of her death, The Telegraph can disclose. ... “He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.” ... Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
Mental health klaxon!
Also a politically motivated murder klaxon, for how else would he have known Ann but from her political views? 🙁
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
They will happen, but free and fair remains to be seen.
Yes the voter suppression act that goes under the ludicrous name of the "Save America Act" is a foretaste of what is to come this autumn.
One set all in the Wimbledon final, Jannick Sinner v. Alexander Zverev.
I know you spend much of your life on British trains and thus think that the populace is entirely cut off from anything resembling news, but the "Sunil News" channel is going to have to do some work to get really popular.
Sunil on Sunday.
Am I imagining things, but perhaps you used to make posts 'Sunil on Sunday' ? You definitely did do some railway travelogues which were first class. .
In case it doesn't bore you:
Track done for the first time:
January 2026
Bickley Jn to Petts Wood Jn via Fast Tonbridge Loop (Southeastern weekend diversion)
Didcot West Curve Jn to Foxhall Jn (GWR weekend diversion - east to north done in 2024)
February
New loops at Cambridge South (station itself yet to open at that time) Northbound via P4 and southbound via P1 (weekdays 1000 to 1530)
Leigh-on-Sea platform 2 arrive/depart (available all day due to weekend engineering work)
March
Acton Town to Northfields (both ways) via outer ("local") tracks due to engineering works (service Acton to Heathrow only)
Barking bay P3 departure (arrival photos 2018) Dagenham East bay platform arrival/departure (arrival in dark 2018) (M-F peak hour reversals)
April
Bull Street to Millennium Point (West Midlands Metro) Millennium Point to Corporation St (also reprised Corporation St to Bull St both ways to account for new junction)
Retford P2 (high level) to Thrumpton West Jn (low level line), both ways. 1345 Worksop to Retford, 1414 from Retford.
May
Reading Spur Jn to Reading New Jn (westbound) CrossCountry engineering diversion Guildford to Reading
Connection to/from Grove Park P1 from/to the main line London Bridge to Bromley North direct service due to engineering elsewhere
June
Moorgate bay platform 3 (Hammersmith & City) Departure only, chance sight of train waiting there.
Minster station TO Minster South Jn Sunday engineering work (opposite direction done in 2017)
Tower Hill P2 westbound both ways (first definitive pics/note!) Eastbound done in 2025
Down through road at Darlington (avoiding station shed)
Glenrothes P2 to Thornton West Jn to Thornton North Jn (both ways) (Glenrothes P1 to Thornton West to South Jn done in 2019)
Larbert curve from Larbert to Falkirk (opposite direction done in 2019)
July
Kilmarnock to Troon (opposite direction done in 2018 and 2019)
Reprised East Kilbride branch to account for new two-track Hairmyres station, newly extended passing loop near there, and electrification
Carstairs north curve towards Edinburgh (towards Glasgow done in 2018)
Up through fast road at Darlington (avoiding station shed and new P5)
Yet another person that Farage has fallen out with to the point of bitter vendetta. It is all part of a pattern.
Mr Carswell has been off the UK scene for a good while. Do the other parties in these supposed vendettas actually engage in vendetta-like behaviour or is it all on Mr Farage's side?
Surely that's the wrong way round. Farage falls out with people and those people launch vendettas against him. It's not to Farage's credit that this happens frequently.
He certainly seems to have had issues like this going back many many years.
Tends to indicate the problem is not other people.
Rather nice piece from Hunter Biden on the death of Graham. Great closing line in particular.
What a strange thing to say. Why would one need to believe in 2029?
I don't know where the 2029 comes from in your post? Although I would assume the date suggests a hope that when Trump is out of office on 20th January 2029 politics in America can return to something bordering on the collegiate, irrespective of rosette colour.
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
20th January 2029, at the latest, is when America after Trump begins. This doesn't need "belief".
It's popular on the American left to pretend Trump will stay in office after then.
Indeed, and it's utterly absurd.
Yes, nothing Trump has ever done has suggested anything less than complete respect for democracy and Constitution.
He left office after losing to Joe Biden
Yes, with characteristic good grace after the riot he incited failed to prevent the result being finalised.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
I’ve read on here they won’t be allowed to happen. So I’m not sure they will.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
I personally thought that a cynical error sold as pragmatism. However comparing it to an attempted coup and demanding faux votes from the Governor of Georgia is a nonsense.
Did you miss the bit where Starmer tried to get the armed wing of the Fabian Society into the Commons to lynch David Lammy?
Hang on, there were multiple deaths from self harm following a stick carrying Fabian gathering?
Many in Reform want to return Britain to an imagined 1950s, a far better time in their opinion, when there was peace and harmony and everyone got along merrily etc etc.
In the 1950s did senior politicians spend all day writing to the newspapers and making wireless comments demanding the police tell them every detail of an on-going inquiry before wildly speculating about motives and so forth?
Comments
There's some mad idea on this board that UK governments are willfully paying foreign governments because they are irrational and weak minded, when it should be obvious the whole Chagos thing is an embarrassment to them and they are only going along with it with extreme reluctance because they don't think have a choice. Or rather the choice is either to settle with Mauritius or play for time, where playing for time just delays the inevitable.
The reason why UK governments have been going along with it, at least until Trump came along, is because US governments have told their UK counterparts/effective vassals in no uncertain terms to settle with Mauritius, to the extent of referring the UK to tribunals who then ruled against it. USG are telling the UKG to do this is because Diego Garcia is a strategic asset for them and they want to sort out the legals.
Trump is causing trouble of course. On the one hand US policy on Diego Garcia hasn't changed, on the other he sees an opportunity to get at Starmer on what he sees as a weakness, an opportunity he won't let pass. I think UKG could actually say, we're washing our hands of the whole thing, you sort it out with Mauritius. For whatever reason it seems UKG isn't going down that route.
Infantino can get a helluva World Cup out of that.
Well according to Scott Jennings just yesterday.
...
“He rarely comes out of the house, his dad used to do everything for him and I don’t know what he did for a living,” she said. “I think once his dad died he went a bit loopy.”
...
Other neighbours said the suspect had lived in the property for at least a year and may have had learning difficulties.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/12/ann-widdecombe-murder-suspect-drove-dartmoor-alleged-murder/ (£££)
Personally I believe that to be unlikely.
Don't forget a whopping win against Count Binface and a Fox is no confirmation of innocence over the £5m bung.
All very odd.
Also, I’m not not saying FO are right on this, I’m not convinced either, but they likely do have some sort of argument, that makes it appear not quite so black and white, that’s not getting much of a hearing.
Getting under the hood why FO love this deal so much they can’t let go, would be interesting.
The ECHR is a plank of the Rules Based Order, and an important part of Churchill's legacy. Even now, I think Tories still - when the red mist has not descended - believe in the rule of international law.
The proposal resembles the Chinese method of roasting a pig by burning the house down.
It's too much of a downside for a bit of tweaking around transgender questions, immigration questions to which it will probably make little difference, and a few others bits and pieces. The downside is that it will undermine elderly people, disabled people, and pregnant woman - of who number in the tens of millions.
I have subconsciously mistaken Lindsey Graham (who I was not expecting to kark it) for Mitch McConnell, who according to CNN checked out on 14th June.
Sorry for the confusion.
Anti-Brexit
Anti-Reform
Anti-Woman
Anti-geriatric
Anti-homphobia
Anti-anti-trans
Or none of the above, just a weapons grade nutter.
I have double figures of articles on PB, each with treble figures of comments, and goodness knows how many backstage convos in the "toilets". I want to preserve them all, please. It's bad enough that my real-life editors have a nasty habit of losing my articles when upgrading their sites (my CV has archive.is links in it as a result), but some of my best stuff is on PB and I donwanna lose them.
Lots of other people have done good work on PB (@Cyclefree, @Quincel, @GarethoftheVale2 , many such cases) and I don't want to lose their stuff either. Plus @TheScreamingEagles and @rcs1000 aren't slouches either.
So @rcs1000 , @TSE, can you tell me the date past which such things can't be accessed, and I'll go to town on archive.is
I am not sure whether he means mean Byelection One or Byelection Two, or where his politics are around Farage at present.
It would be interesting.
* https://www.gbnews.com/politics/nigel-farage-clacton-douglas-carswell-byelection
Imo everyone saying “Maritious in bed with China” over and over have brainwashed themselves, believing something not true. Don’t take my word for it, or the AI slop out there, bit of proper research for yourself and it becomes clear that Mauritius are firmly in bed on military and security with India, who they are quite close to culturally and ethnically too due to historical migration. Mauritius fancy themselves as “East Coast Singapore” as the Chatham House articles call it - trade deals they have signed with everybody and those with China are doing too much heavy lifting for the “totally in bed with China” spin line.
So what else have you got that proves totally in bed with China? Security and military deals that outstrip those they have with India?
Trade deals not enough proof alone, after all UK have sexier trade deals with China - does it put us in bed with China?
Well. Okay. yes. There is that discussion under Blair, brown, Cam, Ossie, May, Boris, perhaps we did we get too far in bed with China on business, an we have been played on security.
Your conclusion that “the Foreign Office is utterly unfit for purpose.” Ties in with Barty in the post just before yours “There is absolutely no binding legal reason why the UK needs to do this Chagos nonsense.”
I’m not saying either point are wrong. But why are FO are so in bed with this idea as sensible in their view.
Maybe the malign influence of India. India want Mauritius to legally have Chagos. Barty is right, they can’t force it legally, but they can apply other forms of strong pressure on UK, in the economic and security spheres we need in the region, that UK are not getting due to India’s influence. So the foreign office is working on a balance what is now worse for UK - accommodation with India and Mauritius legal right on Chagos for all that UK security and trade damage turned off, or keep the status quo, this comes with that trade and security damage for UK from India’s influence in the region, still switched on.
I havn’t sexed it up to be like something from “the great game” - it very much is from a Great Game. And the FO are the pro ballers in that game on behalf of the British People. Where deals with influential power brokers to further your trade and security, never come so black and white as this Chagos one is always being presented in UK media.
Incidentally, JP2 was a goalkeeper before studying for the Priesthood: https://aleteia.org/2018/06/16/how-st-john-paul-ii-became-known-as-lolek-the-goalie/
As a side note, England is the only country with a clear Protestant majority to win the World Cup. All others have gone to majority Catholic countries, with Germany being more or less half and half. There is an interesting (but not convincing case) that the rise of Evangelical Protestantism in Brazil is responsible for the decline in their football.
If this is political it is as likely to be "they cut off some of my benefits (and from the description, this might be the sort of person who could legitimately end up persistently on benefits), Widdecombe spoke harshly about it on TV that morning." The politics of everyday living and personal circumstance rather than higher ideology..
Though you may have your own expertise in this area of course.
It is not as if Mauritius is a former great nation which unjustly had its land and people taken away by European powers, it is itself a product of British and French colonialism.
Bearing in mind that atrump 47 is far less inhibited than Trump 45 can we count on him going more quietly this time?
The Mid-terms should give us some idea.
5 tie-breaks, perhaps!
Probably not an error he will fail with twice.
Meantime in the U.K. our govt genuinely blocked local elections from taking place when they were due and this was only overturned after legal action.
Anyway, telling us stuff we already know is far from the heights.
Edit: (I have been here many years, I'm still working on a worthwhile comment)
Obviously, Biden is not casting doubt on whether or when Trump will eventually go (Trump is mortal after all) and he's not even specifying a date; what he's saying is America after Trump can be worth believing in.
I didn’t
I compared it to people claiming that this years mid terms would be canned.
They would clearly love to do so more often and more openly.
How they must hate it that DJT is such a complete arse in every conceivable way.
Track done for the first time:
January 2026
Bickley Jn to Petts Wood Jn via Fast Tonbridge Loop
(Southeastern weekend diversion)
Didcot West Curve Jn to Foxhall Jn
(GWR weekend diversion - east to north done in 2024)
February
New loops at Cambridge South (station itself yet to open at that time)
Northbound via P4 and southbound via P1
(weekdays 1000 to 1530)
Leigh-on-Sea platform 2 arrive/depart
(available all day due to weekend engineering work)
March
Acton Town to Northfields (both ways) via outer ("local") tracks due to engineering works (service Acton to Heathrow only)
Barking bay P3 departure (arrival photos 2018)
Dagenham East bay platform arrival/departure (arrival in dark 2018)
(M-F peak hour reversals)
April
Bull Street to Millennium Point (West Midlands Metro)
Millennium Point to Corporation St
(also reprised Corporation St to Bull St both ways to account for new junction)
Retford P2 (high level) to Thrumpton West Jn (low level line), both ways.
1345 Worksop to Retford, 1414 from Retford.
May
Reading Spur Jn to Reading New Jn (westbound)
CrossCountry engineering diversion Guildford to Reading
Connection to/from Grove Park P1 from/to the main line
London Bridge to Bromley North direct service due to engineering elsewhere
June
Moorgate bay platform 3 (Hammersmith & City)
Departure only, chance sight of train waiting there.
Minster station TO Minster South Jn
Sunday engineering work
(opposite direction done in 2017)
Tower Hill P2 westbound both ways
(first definitive pics/note!)
Eastbound done in 2025
Down through road at Darlington (avoiding station shed)
Glenrothes P2 to Thornton West Jn to Thornton North Jn (both ways)
(Glenrothes P1 to Thornton West to South Jn done in 2019)
Larbert curve from Larbert to Falkirk (opposite direction done in 2019)
July
Kilmarnock to Troon (opposite direction done in 2018 and 2019)
Reprised East Kilbride branch to account for new two-track Hairmyres station, newly extended passing loop near there, and electrification
Carstairs north curve towards Edinburgh (towards Glasgow done in 2018)
Up through fast road at Darlington (avoiding station shed and new P5)
Tends to indicate the problem is not other people.
In the 1950s did senior politicians spend all day writing to the newspapers and making wireless comments demanding the police tell them every detail of an on-going inquiry before wildly speculating about motives and so forth?
I think not.