 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 23 - 05:57 AM Because part 2 of the single thread for UK politics has reached over 1000 posts I hope to start a new one here. The old one should be closed soon. The end of the old thread |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 23 - 06:12 AM The end of the old thread? The old thread just told me that it's a frayed knot... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 23 - 08:05 AM Is this the joke thread? :-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 23 - 09:30 AM I've just done a longer post that won't post. Grr. I'll try again, whenever... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 21 Jun 23 - 10:20 AM The Cat's had hiccups on and off for a few days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 23 - 04:50 PM Only if it's Tories we're talking about... Watched a documentary called the Labour Files on YouTube last night. OK, it was made (or put together) by Al Jazeera. It dealt with the downfall of Jeremy Corbyn, particularly with regard to the trumped-up antisemitism nonsense. How Labour apparatchik insiders and not a few MPs, including John Mann, Luciana Berger, Margaret Hodge and Ruth Smeeth, especially those with sympathies for Israel, ganged up to demonise him. How Labour were forced into the position of having to accept the deeply flawed IHRA definition of antisemitism. How Zionism, antisemitism and criticism of Israel were conflated in order to prevent any criticism of Israel and how reporting of the treatment of Palestinians was virtually set aside. There were plenty of other disturbing revelations. I'm not looking for confirmation bias and I was extremely aware of the Al Jazeera logo at the bottom of the screen. But I'm piqued into delving a bit more. Anyone who feels the need to criticise Corbyn (and he certainly isn't beyond criticism) should reflect on whether their opinions were formed by dint of what they got from our mainstream media. Even the "unbiased" BBC has a lot to answer for in light of that infamous Panorama documentary. It's lazy talk to characterise him as "a weak leader who led Labour to their worst defeat since the thirties," etc. A bit more deep digging is required in order to see what really went on, especially in the Labour Party. And Starmer doesn't get a free pass either, far from it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 25 Jun 23 - 01:40 PM I just can't bring myself to watch that, Steve. What the Labour party has become is so sad that I cannot bear to get it confirmed any more! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 09 Jul 23 - 02:08 AM Labour ‘throwing the kitchen sink’ at Selby byelection as hopes grow of shock win I can't see how that could really work out well. If Labour do get the seat, they will send a signal that they can win similar seats in the General Election when it occurs, but they will not be able to "throw the kitchen sink" at every such seat, so it will give a false impression of their ability to win. And of course, there is a very high chance of letting the Conservatives win by spittibg the vote. Probably the best result is if Labour do throw the kitchen sink at the seat, but the LibDems still win. In that case, maybe more intelligent tactics will be used for the GE. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Jul 23 - 06:25 AM I agree. And byelections tend to produce maverick results, and these two, whatever happens, will be relegated in the public mind by the time the next election comes round. Playing a straight bat would be less unseemly. That reminds me: I'm just about due to tune into the third Test... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 10 Jul 23 - 05:27 AM Following the ‘painting over cartoon-character murals’ exercise at a reception centre for the children of asylum-seekers because, according to the Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick, they were ‘too welcoming’, I’ve borrowed this from the social media post of a person I know personally. Nail/head, AFAIC… ”Three poems for a Morally Vacant Government that uses Petty Cruelty as a stick with which to beat lost, lonely and already damaged children... #1) "WELL, MR JENRICK, IF WE DIDN’T ALREADY KNOW WHAT TYPE OF HEARTLESS PEOPLE YOUR PARTY ARE, WE DO NOW. Don’t let the children have a look At Mickey Mouse or The Jungle Book Paint over, make them disappear We don’t want a welcome here" - Paul Cookson #2) "No Mickey Mouse Allowed in this house We’re not talking child protection It’s about votes ‘Stopping the boats’ So this is a house of correction A cartoon’s too nice For a heart made of ice It must be painted over The message unsaid: Your folks may be dead But the graves don’t end in Dover" - Attila the Stockbroker #3) "Paint over Mickey Mouse Burn Where the Wild Things Are Pulverise the lego Set fire to the Christmas tree star. Seize all the teddies Bury every skipping rope Paint the walls dark brown Abolish all hope." - Michael Rosen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 10 Jul 23 - 01:32 PM .... Ah *that*'s why the English news is wall-to-wall coverage of that kerfuffle about a Beeb presenter: stir up a Saville-storm, and nobody remembers Mickey Mouse being painted over, or Thames Water being sold off and collapsing in a cloud of debt and excrement, or [snip: I too forget them all]. The only escape is Radio Four, whose news bulletins cover more than one subject (they don't yet suffer from Bone-of-the-Week syndrome), and where the satire programmes tell us what's really going on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Mr Red Date: 15 Jul 23 - 03:05 AM Jeremy Corbyn, particularly with regard to the trumped-up antisemitism nonsense As I remember it, he overtly supported things "not Israel/Jewish" and that was to garner support from those less covert in their anti-Israel stance. Other views are available, subject to confirmation bias. And while we are "on topic", Corbyn was not only un-electable, and obviously so, he wanted Brexshit so he could make his own laws that weren't necessarily European ones. His public stance on Brexshit was to leave a free vote. A prudent or timid position depending on which side of the 50/50 you sit. Cue accusations of being Tory or something, here it comes.......................... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Jul 23 - 11:19 AM Nope. The appropriate response to that is that you are suffering severely from Daily Mailism. You forget that, against all the odds, he trashed Theresa May's majority in 2017. That's when his own party did the right's dirty work in demonising him, both via senior members refusing to join his shadow cabinet and via a small gang of Israeli regime apologists confecting a bogus antisemitism campaign against him. Yes we party members in massive numbers held our heads and groaned at his stance on brexit. As a party leader he was flawed. Michael Foot was similar in many regards. But make no mistake: it was not that Corbyn was unelectable, rather that his own party made him unelectable - deliberately so. It seemed that they'd rather lose an election than have him as leader. You can largely thank all those Labour right-wingers for delivering Boris Johnson to us. Not the only factor, of course. After 2017 the surprised right-wing gutter press decided that they needed to go to town on Corbyn. The Tories hardly had to bother. It was all also an object lesson on how you can't make it without an army of vicious spin-doctors. Whether you're Tory or not is your private business unless you choose to divulge. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Jul 23 - 11:47 AM When I refer to the party, I'm talking about the party's political establishment, not the hundreds of thousands of party members who joined when he was elected leader. The right in the party don't like us much, either. They don't care that we're leaching away in droves. In fact, they welcome it. Too many of us are on the left for their taste. And look what we have now: an unprincipled leader whose best skill is U-turning on policy and who is just as unconvincing as Corbyn, with his only saving grace being that the right of the party prop him up while the left are either expelled on the most puny of pretexts or who, alternatively, had better shut up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 19 Jul 23 - 09:57 AM Steve: I think you're being a little disingenuous (or looking through RED-tinted glasses) in claiming that Corbyn trashed May's majority. My view would be that that was mainly down to Theresa may failing to make good on Brexit, and making too many concessions to Brussels thus leaving us in a much poorer negotiating position. If it was down to Corbyn, why did he not repeat the result against Boris two years later? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jul 23 - 10:23 AM Who is being a little disingenuous now, Nigel? Do you not think that the media and right wing of the Labour party had anything to do with Corbyn's defeat 2 years later? When it is known that members of his own party would rather lose the election than have him as leader it became impossible to repeat the earlier result. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 19 Jul 23 - 10:23 AM Well it was a general election with two main antagonists. Admittedly, the old saw that elections are lost rather than won has more than a grain of truth, as you're suggesting in this case. But the result was unexpected (and she did lose her overall majority: trashed?), it set alarm bells ringing on the right (as well as among the right in the Labour Party) and it triggered an onslaught by the right-wing media and from within his own party for the next two years. He is a naive, unspun man (not good qualities in a leader, I'm the first to admit) and he didn't know how to counter the attacks, and he accorded his opponents a field day when it came to brexit. Elections are won and lost for many complex reasons and it's impossible to to assign relative importance accurately to any one of them, but I take your point. Cheers for your civilly-expressed and thoughtful disagreement, Nigel. We could use more of that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 19 Jul 23 - 11:47 AM No-one in Labour is ever going to admit it, but the onslaught on Corbyn from within the party during that two years, executed in the knowledge that the Tories would never contemplate a full term with a shabby minority shored up only by a bunch of illiberal antediluvian types in Northern Ireland, amounted to a deliberate suicide note for the next election. Even had Corbyn resigned before the election, the scramble for a new leader (go on - tell me who!) would still have guaranteed defeat. In the unlikely event of a Corbyn victory in 2019, the right in the party would not have been able to stomach him as PM. The party right wanted him to lose so that they could then do what they're doing now, trying to abolish the left of the party completely and ruthlessly. The last time we had a leftie PM was Atlee, when the circumstances were extraordinary. Labour's core at the top has always been to the right of its centre. It's their party and they're ruthless bastards... But it won't work for long. That's history for you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 20 Jul 23 - 02:52 PM From Attila The Stockbroker today - right on the button as usual… ”Farage is a banker Who can no longer bank The rhyme is far too obvious But just once Coutts I’ll thank Though while we roar with laughter And try not to think of tissues Remember it’s a smokescreen To distract from other issues” |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 20 Jul 23 - 04:59 PM Of course, the Coutts/Farage story was reported by the BBC who claimed that his account was closed because his funding was insufficient for a Coutts account. It has now been proved otherwise. Remember Pastor Martin Niemöller First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Do we really want banks that can deny you an account because they disagree with your political leanings? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Jul 23 - 06:02 PM Most banks have right-wing leanings, at least it seems that way if we scrutinise their predilection for investing our money in organisations which will give them the best returns as opposed to organisations that try to be moral or ethical. There are several banks that abide by Sharia law, and in many ways they are far more "moral" than our friendly high street banks. For example, they will not invest in companies that deal in alcohol or gambling. But hey. The Farage farrago should be seen for what it is: the distempered blustering of a man who is providing us with an amusing aside. He said today that Coutts is just a political campaigning setup. As they won't have you unless you have three million, I was wondering which side they are supposedly campaigning for. Doubt whether it would for anyone on the left... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Jul 23 - 02:29 AM It was the last two lines in Attila’s little piece that were the most telling and important, AFAIC. I don’t give a flying you-know-what about the gobby man-frog’s financial arrangements or lack of them, and his public display of self-pity disgusts me, but every time there’s a media tempest in a teapot about something inconsequential to the vast majority of us, I wonder what they’re trying to distract us from - usually the actions of this dishonest, rapacious government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Jul 23 - 04:03 AM I’ve never understood the obsession of the press and media with Farage - a failed would-be politician, the former leader of a small minority-party, who never even managed to get elected to Parliament. He’s a has-been, more likely a never-was, a nobody. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jul 23 - 07:08 AM Mebbe it's just me, but I regard the Uxbridge result as a shot across Labour's bows. The ULEZ factor clearly lost Labour this seat and there are plenty more vulnerable seats in London. The ULEZ expansion is an unfair and clumsy move, and, now that it's lost us what should have been an easy seat to pick up, it's going to be hard to reverse without Labour looking bloody stupid. Not trying to be environmentally unfriendly here, by the way, but blackmailing thousands of Londoners into having to change their cars within nine months (whilst leaving most Chelsea tractor gas-guzzlers alone) or pay punitive daily fees is simply not the way forward. If you have an older, non-compliant car, you're more likely to be among the less well-off. Punishing their owners is not my idea of the Labour way. Bad judgements costs seats. Blair got in by avoiding bad judgements in the mid-1990s. Can't trust Starmer to do the same. He's put an unfair cap on child benefits, he won't support public sector trade unions, he's backtracked on several pledges already... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Jul 23 - 07:33 AM I agree about Sadiq Khan’s ULEZ changes, a bad miscalculation on his part. But there was still a swing to Labour - a 7k Tory majority reduced to 475. On that basis, ‘vulnerable’ Labour seats in Greater London must surely be ‘safer’? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jul 23 - 01:10 PM But the ULEZ thing has opened a Pandora's box. These schemes are in the offing in several other large urban (Labour) areas. In each case you are, in effect, telling poorer motorists, the ones with older cars, that they'd better scrap them. I bought a diesel in 2010 when the story was that diesels were the saviours of the world. Its emissions were so low that my road tax was thirty quid a year. I changed that car last year and I don't live in the ULEZ zones, so it doesn't apply to me, but if it had my car would have been non-compliant. Had I been told that I either get rid of my car or pay £12.50 per day, not only would I be hopping mad but I'd also feel cheated after having bought it in good faith. Not good enough, Labour, favouring the rich and shitting on the poor. And give the Tories the notion that single issues can swing elections. Disastrous. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Jul 23 - 02:39 PM As I said previously, I agree about the folly of Khan’s ULEZ expansion, for the reasons you’ve given. And the Tories already know that ‘single issues can swing elections’ - don’t tell me you’ve already forgotten ‘Get Brexit Done’? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jul 23 - 02:49 PM Exactly! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jul 23 - 06:47 PM I said just after he was elected leader that Starmer is a loser and a follower of what he perceives to be fashion. I said that he will not win the next election. Since then we've had Johnson's disreputable behaviour and we've had Truss and Kamikaze, and a pandemic that the Tories handled so badly that there were tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths. I still don't think that Stodgy Starmer will win. At best, he might end up leading the biggest party. Then what. He makes misstep after misstep. He told his MPs that they mustn't join picket lines. The leader of a party spawned by trade unions telling his ministers not to join legitimate trade union pickets! He's tried to sideline the left using the most dishonest and flimsy ploys. He's refused to support public sector unions in their fight against Tory austerity and thirteen years of pay freezes. He supports the Tories' inhuman cap on child benefit. He won't even say that he'll honour pay review body recommendations. Plenty more, including broken pledges. A terrible shadow chancellor. A London Labour mayor who is screwing the poor and indulging the wealthy. We might hold our noses and do whatever we can to vote out the Tories. Out. But there will be no ringing endorsement of Starmer. Wrong man, wrong time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Jul 23 - 07:26 PM I said just after he was elected leader that Starmer is a loser and a follower of what he perceives to be fashion. I said that he will not win the next election. This will continue for as long as Keir Starmer tries to be everything to everybody without committing himself to any policies. I'm quite happy to let him continue as he is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Jul 23 - 02:08 PM I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Khan and Starmer have their private barney about ULEZ. I'll bet anyone here at least sixpence that the policy on ULEZ will change. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 22 Jul 23 - 02:10 PM For once, Steve, I hope you’re right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jul 23 - 05:03 AM Feeling the pinch in these days of rip-roaring inflation? Happy to settle (after years of pay freezes and austerity, even though "we are all in it together") for a pay rise around half the rate of inflation? Why, the answer is to be the King! As from 2025, he's to get a 45% rise! From the Guardian: ...the government has seen fit to offer the new king a rise estimated to be 45% from 2025. The precise figure will depend on profits from the government property portfolio known as the crown estate. The projected increase of £38.5m, taking the sovereign grant from £86m to £125m, undermines King Charles’s often-cited commitment to “slim down” the monarchy. The decision, which was taken by a committee of three people – prime minister Rishi Sunak, the chancellor Jeremy Hunt, and the keeper of the privy purse, Sir Michael Stevens... So is this ancient, bumbling national parasite worth it, d'ye think? Does it swing it for you that his missus is such a sparkling, witty personality? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jul 23 - 05:09 AM Oh and by the way, during the ten years of Tory austerity since 2013, the Sovereign Grant has gone up from £31 million to £86 million. To them that have, it shall be given, commenteth the Lord.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 24 Jul 23 - 06:25 AM .... Man shall not live by bread alone, but try thou convincing thine income tax inspector. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 24 Jul 23 - 06:32 AM I think you’re preaching to the wrong congregation on here, Steve. I get the feeling that the majority of us are already in agreement with you, and I can think of only one contributor, maybe two, who is/are sufficiently brainwashed by Right-Wing propaganda to disagree. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Stanron Date: 24 Jul 23 - 07:01 AM "Feeling the pinch in these days of rip-roaring inflation? Happy to settle (after years of pay freezes and austerity, even though "we are all in it together") for a pay rise around half the rate of inflation? Why, the answer is to be the King! As from 2025, he's to get a 45% rise!" "I think you’re preaching to the wrong congregation on here, Steve. I get the feeling that the majority of us are already in agreement with you, and I can think of only one contributor, maybe two, who is/are sufficiently brainwashed by Right-Wing propaganda to disagree." Typical lefty group think. Stoking jealousy with lies. Sovereign Grant only occurs after all income from royal estates go directly to the Treasury. An inconvenient truth for lefties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 24 Jul 23 - 07:12 AM ”I can think of only one contributor, maybe two, who is/are sufficiently brainwashed by Right-Wing propaganda to disagree.” And, right on cue, up pops the second brainwashed one I was thinking of… :-) :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jul 23 - 07:55 AM Yup! The profits from the Crown Estate should go back to the people, which is who the Crown Estate should morally belong to. Instead, a huge sum from those profits is hived off every year to further enrich one of the richest men in the country, a man who does nothing in connection with the Crown Estate to earn that money. In my view it's a massive scandal, but, as ever, the establishment will do its damnedest to legitimise it, and will succeed. That's how people like Stanron are hoodwinked into thinking that it's all OK. Stick a crown and a few robes on Charlie (slaughter a bit of game first), send him abroad every now and then to be cheered by flag-waving picaninnies, get him to ride his regalia-bedecked horse every June and wave at us from a balcony surrounded by his fellow parasites and their brats, and hardly anyone will notice... Worth a moment looking into the Crown Estate, by the way. It's one of the most powerful institutions in the country. It owns all of our seabed and over half the foreshore, thousands of acres of land and lucrative properties in our towns, cities and countryside, among other things. A graduated land tax would sort 'em out, but there I am again sailing into cloud cuckoo land... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 24 Jul 23 - 08:08 AM Is the Crown more powerful than the banks? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jul 23 - 07:20 PM What do you mean by "the Crown"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jul 23 - 07:54 PM Mrs Steve and I were very sad when we heard of the passing of George Alagiah. What a fantastic reporter he was, and, by all accounts, he was a great humanitarian and a lovely man to work with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 25 Jul 23 - 05:51 PM I'm seeing news reports on the BBC about the devastation caused to civilians in the civil war in Yemen. Villages devastated, children with limbs blown off, that sort of thing. Not a single mention of the fact that we have provided £15 billions of weapons to Saudi and the UAE since the start of the war. Weapons being used to bomb villages and blow children up. Still, never mind. We can just let them infiltrate and take over our biggest sports teams and mop up our best footballers with promises of wages of tens or hundreds of millions a year. I think we call it sportswashing. Let me guess: oil... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 28 Jul 23 - 09:11 AM When you say the profits from the Crown Estate should go to the people, that is what happens. Or rather, they go to the Treasury, which is as close as "the people" are going to get. The Sovereign Grant isn't the King's wages but is to cover the cost of official duties, including staff salaries and travel. It doesn't go to enrich the King personally, and any surplus goes to a reserve fund to be used for future spending. It's entirely legitimate to argue that these duties should be reduced in scale, but for the time being most people seem to quite like having a royal come to open their new hospital wing. Even if we replaced the monarchy with a president, that would still have to be paid for. The Sovereign Grant is higher than usual because it includes the cost of refurbishing Buckingham Palace. The building is an asset of the state, and if it weren't paid for through the Sovereign Grant it would simply come out of some government department's budget. £125 million sounds a lot, and it is. However set against total government spending of £1,283 billion a year it is a drop in the ocean. If it were to be abolished entirely (and there will always be some costs to have a head of state) this would make no discernible difference to the public finances. There are very good arguments both for and against abolishing the monarchy, but the Sovereign Grant is a red herring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: G-Force Date: 28 Jul 23 - 09:50 AM £125 million is about £2 each, which is less than half a pint in a pub round here. I'd miss the monarchy but I don't notice the half pint. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Raggytash Date: 28 Jul 23 - 09:57 AM I'd rather have the half. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 Jul 23 - 10:31 AM Minimising the impact of the grant on us all is the real red herring. It's the principle of the thing. He's one of the country's richest men yet we get to pay for his new roof "because it's a state asset." Really? It's actually a very average building and an "asset" to no-one except brainless tourists who go to gawp through the railings. And you'd have a tough time showing that its presence brings in any extra revenue, as (as has been mentioned several times before) hardly any of the "royal assets" ever make the top twenty tourist attractions in this country. We'd get by very nicely thank you in terms of tourism without their "assets." Pretending that it doesn't matter because it's only the price of a half-pint he's stealing from each and every one of us is like me justifying stealing a bunch of bananas from Sainsbury's because "they're only worth a quid." Yeah, right... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Rain Dog Date: 28 Jul 23 - 01:24 PM "brainless tourists who go to gawp" And how many places have you gone to gawp? Or does that count? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 28 Jul 23 - 02:18 PM I doubt many publicly owned buildings generate income, that is not really what most state activities are intended for. Nevertheless the royal residences earned nearly £50m from tourism in 2019-20. Buck House is mainly an administrative building for the head of state, with offices and function rooms. Come the revolution you can sell it off, and it might raise enough to pay for the NHS for a day or two. Until then it is the responsibility of the state. It is not the King's roof, it is the government's, and they are giving him the money to fix it. An elected head of state will still need an official residence and an administration. The role of head of state, whether a hereditary monarch or elected president, is a function of government to be paid for from the public purse, which is funded by taxation and income from revenue-producing activities, including the Crown Estate. It is legitimate to question those costs, and in a democracy to campaign for change. However it is a nonsense to claim that this is "stealing" from us, any more than the costs of running other state functions such as 10 Downing Street, the Foreign Office or indeed your local library are stealing from us. In the context of the public finances £125m is a rounding error. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 Jul 23 - 03:49 PM When an extremely rich man is obtaining the price of a half-pint from someone on a low wage who relies on food banks, and does it without that person's permission, I call that stealing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 Jul 23 - 06:40 PM "Buck House is mainly an administrative building for the head of state, with offices and function rooms." Absolutely not the case. Do read the wiki article on Buckingham Palace. You'll be amazed at what goes on there on top of the "administrative" side of things (which could easily be executed in ordinary offices anywhere in the country, by the way). And we pay for it, including the hundreds of millions needed to renovate it. As for the Crown Estate, and those huge "duchies" that Charlie owns, they simply should not exist beyond full nationalised control, and the filthy-rich monarch should not be able to hive off tens or hundreds of millions per annum from them for purposes that are generally hidden from public view and which are dubious at best. Finally, are you able to tell us what happens to the fifty million that the "royal residences"(gosh, don't they need so many of them! Still, I don't suppose there are too many grouse to shoot at round Buckingham Palace) earned last year? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 Jul 23 - 06:42 PM That Charlie or his parasitic offspring owns, I should have said... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 28 Jul 23 - 07:36 PM Steve: hardly any of the "royal assets" ever make the top twenty tourist attractions in this country. This site gives: #9 The Tower of London #11 Buckingham Palace #12 Windsor Castle Would you care to let us know where you find your top 20? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 Jul 23 - 08:01 PM So your best shot is Buck House at number 11! And we've had this thing about the Tower of London before, haven't we? Would you care to tell us when it was last occupied by any royal? And please don't regale me with the fact that it's the shameful home of the disgusting Crown Jewels... As for the most popular, it's depends on which website you look things up. The Visit Britain site gives two top ten lists, free ones and paid ones. No royal attraction makes it to either list, not even the Tower if you really insist on having it as a royal attraction, which I heartily dispute. And that website does it by numbers of visitors, not by someone's subjective opinion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 28 Jul 23 - 08:12 PM That is a bit of a daft presumption, isn't it? Do you really believe that the draw to the Tower of London is the current members of the royal family? I would have thought that the attraction would be the associations with William the Conqueror, the tudors, imprisonments, tortures and executions, the ravens. In all, distant history - I don;t think the 1940s executions are much of a royal connection. I will concede that the crown jewels is an attraction, but I would dispute id this would a sole reason or even a main reason for visiting the attraction. I would argue that people visit Windsor castle because it is a castle that is accessible and just outside of London. I suppose I should concede regarding Buckingham Palace which would mean that the royal family co contributes to no more than 5% if hospitability and tourism. Also, if the monarchy was abolished, would Buckingham Palace be any less of interest? From my knowledge the Palace of Versailles doesn't suffer in visitor numbers through France being a republic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 28 Jul 23 - 08:25 PM Good post. Just to reiterate that the Visit Britain website includes neither Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle nor the Tower in either top ten. Though I must say, you did forget the Beefeaters... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:12 AM In the British constitution (and we do have one, even if it's not set out in a single document) "the Crown" represents what in other countries might be referred to as the State. It includes not only the Sovereign but also the executive (the UK and devolved governments), the legislature (parliament) and the judiciary. Most of the powers of the Crown are exercised by these institutions. You don't seem to recognise the distinction between Charles as an individual and the position he holds. As an individual is indeed very wealthy (although not exceptionally so - he is only 263 in the Sunday Times Rich List). However as Sovereign he also performs an official role on behalf of the State, and the cost of this should be paid for by the State. These costs don't come out of your or my taxes but from income from property owned by the State. You call for the Crown Estate to be nationalised. The Crown Estate belongs to the Sovereign, but this means the role rather than the person holding it. In other words, it belongs to the State, and to all intents and purposes has done since the eighteenth century. It is not King Charles's personal property. It is managed by an independent board who are accountable to Parliament, and its profits all go to the Treasury. In what respect is this not nationalised? The State has overheads, which include the costs of performing the Sovereign's official duties. To repeat myself, the Sovereign Grant is not a personal payment to the King, any more than the £22m or so it costs to run Downing Street are a personal payment to Rishi Sunak. You may consider some of these costs to be unnecessary or wasteful. That's a perfectly respectable point of view. However in the context of total public spending the amount is trivial, and even if the Sovereign Grant were to be abolished entirely it would make no discernible different to the public finances. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Raggytash Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:26 AM "However in the context of total public spending the amount is trivial" Perhaps you could arrange for me to have just 10% of the costs of running Downing Street, as you say £2.2 million is a trivial amount. I promise you will never hear me complain ever again. . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:37 AM Steve: Good post. Just to reiterate that the Visit Britain website includes neither Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle nor the Tower in either top ten. Though I must say, you did forget the Beefeaters... :- Nice of you to iterate. But you haven't given a link to your source. Yes 'Visit Britain' can be searched, and their list of attractions is Here Not only is it false to claim that The Tower doesn't appear, it is listed as No1 in the 'paid' attractions. So your best shot is Buck House at number 11! And we've had this thing about the Tower of London before, haven't we? Would you care to tell us when it was last occupied by any royal? 1603 apparently Shifting the goalposts? hardly any of the "royal assets" ever make the top twenty tourist attractions in this country. There is a difference between 'royal assets' and assets 'occupied' by royals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:48 AM Well I'm not going to argue with you over those technicalities but I'd like to come back at you with two points. First, so he's "only" no 263 on the Sunday Times rich list and you don't think that's exceptional. Well in a country of sixty-odd million people, I think that 263rd richest is exceptionally exceptional. By the way, he's as rich as that because he inherited his riches, not because he worked for them, and his ancestors amassed that wealth over centuries by nefarious means, including taking it from the people, exploiting the labour of the people and indulging in the slave trade. Nice. Second, you say that the amount is trivial in the overall scheme of things. Apart from the fact that £125 million is hardly what I'd call trivial, it's the principle of the thing. Millions of people in this country, given the choice and the facts of the matter, would probably disapprove of this gift from the nation, but choice in the matter we have not. As for his necessary expenses, etc., which he has the money hundreds of times over to pay for out of his own pocket, he travels everywhere in the lap of luxury and is carted around, not in a J-reg Astra or on Ryanair but in a fleet limousines that has cost us millions and in private jets that are entirely at his disposal. A bit more comfy than my budget flight to Malaga in a few weeks' time, yet I'm giving HIM money and he gives me nothing. Trivial? Well that bunch of bananas I'm thinking of stealing from Sainsbury's is trivial to Sainsbury's, almost representing a victimless crime. But you wouldn't defend it, would you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:51 AM Of course to you or me these are large sums. But in the context of total public spending of £1182 billion a year the £125m Sovereign Grant represents only 0.01%. As I said in a previous post, that's a rounding error. If every penny of public expenditure were spent effectively then perhaps if the Sovereign Grant were abolished it might make a difference. The fact is that some waste and inefficiencies are inevitable even in the most rigorous organisation, and the public sector does not have a record of rigorous financial controls or efficiencies. The reality is that even if the Sovereign Grant could be entirely abolished it would not enable the government to cut taxes or improve public services. This is why I used the word "trivial". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:54 AM Oops, sorry, Nigel. I failed to spot that narrow white strip at the top of the table. That doesn't change my view that the Tower should in no way be regarded as a royal asset. As you point out, it has not be used by the royals for four hundred years except to house their disgusting collection of jewellery, which anyone with even a smidgeon of principle should boycott. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:56 AM Nice bit of whataboutery there, Howard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 29 Jul 23 - 09:13 AM That's not really the point Howard. The bloke could easily afford the £125 million a year himself but the government choses to pay it out of taxes raised on everyones income. Including mine and yours. I object most strongly to my meagre income being used to subsidise the 263rd richest person in the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 29 Jul 23 - 11:33 AM People aren't normally expected to pay the running costs of doing their job. For example, if a minister travels on official business you'd expect their department to pay for their travel costs regardless of their personal wealth. Why should the King be different? We don't expect Rishi Sunak, who's very nearly as rich, to pay for the costs of Downing Street and its staff out of his own pocket. The Sovereign Grant is actually the budget for running a department of the state. It is not a payment into the King's own pocket for him to use for his own purposes. If the monarchy were to be replaced by an elected president would you expect them to pay for all the costs of official business themselves? Neither does it come out of your or my taxes. It comes out of the income from property owned by the state. State spending runs at over £3 billion pounds a day, and abolishing the Sovereign Grant would pay for less than an hour of that. That's not going to bring down your or my taxes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Jul 23 - 12:33 PM It's still money that doesn't rightfully belong to him whether you call it tax or not. I don't equate what he does with a "job", either. And comparing his "expenses" with those of the PM is simply laughable. The PM runs the country and, on the whole, does not indulge at frequent intervals in extravagant pageantry. When the PM resigns or loses an election, he's booted out of Downing Street in summary fashion. That can never be the fate of Charlie apropos of Buckingham Palace or any of his other ill-gotten residences. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 29 Jul 23 - 12:56 PM Doing his job Howard? How does that equate to earning millions from the properties that he inherited from the people who 'acquired' them in various dodgy ways or being paid for doing sweet FA in the running of the country? I would never expect people to pay for doing an honest day's work but you are being very disingenuous suggesting that Charlie is doing either an honest day's work or making money for the country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 29 Jul 23 - 04:01 PM The Royal Family carried out around 3000 engagements last year. These included community visits, meeting visiting heads of state, investitures, garden parties etc. It doesn't include the weekly meetings with the PM, approving legislation or other constitutional duties. You may think these unnecessary or pointless pageantry, but successive governments have agreed that these are appropriate activities for the head of state. They are not of a nature which directly generates income for the country, but indirectly they contribute to international relations, and community visits and garden parties help to boost morale within the UK. If you don't like that, campaign for change to elect a government which will get rid of it, as may happen soon in Australia. However I think you'll find that an elected president has a very similar workload. Take a look at the Irish president's engagements for example and you'll see they are of a very similar nature. Steve is concerned that the money "doesn't rightfully belong to him", but it goes to him only in the same way as a government department's budget goes to the Secretary of State. The money is to cover the costs of the king's official duties. It doesn't go to the king personally. As far as I am aware he isn't paid a salary for performing these official duties, and his personal expenditure comes out of his private income. You seem to have an inflated idea of his personal wealth. The Sunday Times Rich List estimates his personal wealth at £600m. That's a very tidy sum, but it's capital, not income. He could not "well afford" to pay £125m a year. Do the sums. To repeat, these are the facts: The Crown Estate belongs to the state, it is not the personal property of the monarch. 100% of its profits go to the Treasury, and its board is answerable to parliament. For those calling for it to be nationalised, that has effectively been the position since the eighteenth century. The Sovereign Grant does not come out of general taxation but from the profits of the Crown Estate. The Sovereign Grant is to cover the costs of the official duties of the monarch. It does not go to the king personally. It is overseen by trustees who are also answerable to parliament. Any surplus does not go into the king's pocket but to a reserve fund. The Sovereign Grant amounts to around 0.01% of all public expenditure. Any changes to it either way don't materially affect the public finances. There are many respectable arguments for getting rid of the monarchy, but the cost savings to the public purse would not be noticeable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Jul 23 - 04:28 PM It's not the cost saving to the public purse. It's the principle. Anyway, you're a dyed-in-the-wool royalist and I'm a republican (small r please). Sadly, the twain are unlikely to meet in this case. I'm sure you're a lovely, jovial fellow. That'll do me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Raggytash Date: 29 Jul 23 - 05:48 PM Michael D Higgins, the President of Ireland, earns 250,000 Euro for his role. I make that 1 500th of the fee. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:04 PM More facts about the Sovereign Grant that could have Howard shifting uncomfortably from one buttock to the other: The money pays not just for Charlie's junkets but also for those of a good number of royal hangers-on, identities unspecified. The Queen's funeral and his subsequent coronation cost the taxpayer over £200 million. It's late but I'll keep digging... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 30 Jul 23 - 05:53 PM Steve: Imagine this. We go back to everyone owning their own little plot of land, and using it to grow vegetables (and if they're very lucky to fatten livestock). If they can't provide for their families just from this, and from trading food for services that they require (work on their habitations, etc.) They will probably end up using someone (further up the 'food chain') to arrange a 'fair' method of exchanging what they can produce for what they need to buy. Allowing for this intermediary to make some sort of a living from this eventually you'll get a system where those who produce foodstuffs and are providing goods to those who can't, need a middle-man arranging the dealings, and taking a cut. Eventually the middle-man will expand what he's doing and make a small profit from everyone who he is helping to deal 'what they have' for 'what they want' as people with a product to sell don't always want something that their prospective buyers want to exchange. Just swap the 'government' or 'the royal family' for the 'middle man'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Howard Jones Date: 30 Jul 23 - 06:43 PM €250,000 is the President of Ireland's salary. That does actually go into his own pocket, whereas as far as I am aware the King does not receive a salary. The cost of running the Office of the President is more than €4.8m. That is of course considerably less than the Sovereign Grant, but it covers the same sort of expenses - staff, office costs, travel etc. I can't find a figure for the number of engagements the President carries out, but it is probably in the hundreds rather than the 3000 or so carried out by the Royal Family, which as you point out includes those carried out by other working royals as well as the king, so of course the costs are less. If you like to think of these engagements as "junkets" fair enough, although they seem to be popular with the public. You may wish to replace the monarchy with a republic. but I think you'll find that in many republics the president's role includes similar junkets. I also think you'll find that the state pays for them. Republics also have state funerals and investitures. However I quite understand if you feel there are too many of these junkets and that they're unnecessary. You say "it's a matter of principle". To me, the principle is that the state should pay for activities carried out on its behalf. However I'll leave it there, as you've clearly made your mind up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 31 Jul 23 - 10:09 AM The British monarch can't be arrested or be the subject of civil and criminal proceedings, meaning he is effectively exempt from the law. King Charles enjoys sovereign immunity, meaning he can't be prosecuted under a civil or criminal investigation. HOWEVER I could sue Steve Shaw for defamation or pay to have 4,000 of his internet posts removed but since I use a fictional avatar it complicates matters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 31 Jul 23 - 10:24 AM Everything you do seems fictional Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 31 Jul 23 - 03:48 PM It’s frictional too, Dave - it certainly rubs some people the wrong way! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 31 Jul 23 - 03:52 PM BG :-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 31 Jul 23 - 05:00 PM Go ahead, Donuel! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 31 Jul 23 - 05:39 PM As an internet ghost, you aren't worth a pense of legal fees. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 23 - 03:51 AM Ignoring American attempts to derail this thread, and back to UK Politics - Attila the Stockbroker on FarceBook this morning, finger right on the button as usual… ”The planet is burning and Sunak is issuing new oil and gas licences, ripping up commitments and sending a message to the world that the U.K. doesn’t give a monkey’s. He’s doing it because he thinks it will glean the Tories working class votes. And his excuse is that these new fields will use ‘carbon capture’ technology. Now I may be wrong, but I seem to remember this phrase from the latter days of the miners’ campaign, when it was posited as a way of keeping pits open while minimising carbon emissions. Back then of course it was dismissed out of hand, because closing pits and wrecking communities was a Tory ideological class war decision which had nothing to do with climate change concerns - the coal was simply imported from elsewhere. If it had been implemented then there would have been less carbon in the atmosphere and fewer mining communities destroyed - but destroying mining communities was the Tories’ Thatcherite aim. Back then, they were ‘the enemy within’, and obliterating them was part of a strategy to cut off the head of the trade union movement and destroy organised labour once and for all. But in this new era, when the right wing tabloids have, incredibly, managed to persuade some of those very same communities to switch sides by blaming ‘immigrants’ for the crimes committed by the Tories, feeding xenophobia and stoking division, re-opening oil and gas fields and granting new mining licences is seen as a strategy to win votes. And, as before, the climate crisis doesn’t even enter the equation. It’s all just a cynical electioneering strategy. Close down communities for ideological and electoral reasons, offer them false hope on the same basis. A cynical crime against the planet.” |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Stanron Date: 01 Aug 23 - 04:58 AM The planet isn't burning in Clayton Manchester UK. It's colder here than it has been for the last four weeks and five days. 14 degrees C as I write this. Perhaps it's a Guarniad typo and he meant to write " The Lefties are boring". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 01 Aug 23 - 05:56 AM Time was when people would complain of unduly cold weather, and I'd say "I blame global warming", meaning climate change shifting the weather patterns around. England's suffering a mild cold spell this week, while much of Europe, and the rest of the world, burns. Be careful what you wish for, Stanron. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 01 Aug 23 - 06:36 AM Backwoodsman: If you're going to blockquote some external source could you at least give your opinions on the matter, not just state "finger right on the button"? For example, do you agree with his comment "because closing pits and wrecking communities was a Tory ideological class war decision"? Are you aware, or is he aware, that more pits were closed under Wilson (Lab.) than under Thatcher (Con.) ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 01 Aug 23 - 06:51 AM My memory of the time was that the pits were closing anyway .... but that Maggie Hatchett chose that hill for Arthur Scargill to die on, and he obliged her. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 23 - 06:59 AM My opinion of the miners’ strike and its aftermath is that the miners were cannon-fodder in a war of opposing political ideologies conducted by two crackpots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 23 - 07:49 AM And “Finger right on the button” was my opinion, Nigel. No need to write ‘War and Peace’, that’s the speciality of others on the forum. FWIW, the difference between pit-closures during Wilson’s tenure and those of the Thatcher years is the matter of intent and purpose - in the case of the Wilson closures, the intent was to make the coal industry operate more efficiently and thereby ensure its continuation, whereas Thatcher’s intent - as Attila pointed out correctly in his piece - was to break the trade-unions, emasculate worker-power, and destroy the industry. It was a vicious, politically-driven, ideological enterprise, and a major part of the Tory Class-war of that period. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 01 Aug 23 - 07:52 AM Apologies, pressed the ‘Go’ button before I added the disclaimer - “As always, the standard disclaimer applies - IMHO, and YMMV. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Aug 23 - 07:52 PM Anyone wanna buy a third-hand defunct barge, seats 500, or possibly none...? And has anyone seen Suella recently? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 14 Aug 23 - 03:19 AM They should tow it up the Thames and moor it by the Palace of Westminster. Then it could be used to house MPs, and save the taxpayer a fortune by removing the opportunity for those ‘second-home’ flip-flop scams they seem to love so much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Rain Dog Date: 14 Aug 23 - 08:01 AM "Anyone wanna buy a third-hand defunct barge, seats 500, or possibly none...?" I was not aware that the owners were looking to sell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Aug 23 - 08:53 AM If they find anything else wrong with it, it'll be scrap value only. By the way, even if it fills right up it will hold just 1% of asylum seekers. Anyone got another 99 going spare? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Rain Dog Date: 14 Aug 23 - 09:14 AM Scrap value only? Your best joke yet. Once they have cleared up the Legionella bacteria problem I am sure that there will still be a use for it somewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 14 Aug 23 - 09:51 AM I think Cruella is looking to buy it and make a quick profit. Probably sell it to Rwanda... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 14 Aug 23 - 10:01 AM
The purpose of the barge is not to house asylum seekers: it's to provide headline fodder about a moral panic they stirred up in the first place. .... Hm: It's been reported that the political "silly season" went away. *bzzt* Wrong: it's silly season the year round. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Sep 23 - 11:03 AM Well still no planes full of refugees to Rwanda and still no asylum seekers on the barge. So Cruella goes to the US, gives a speech to a right-wing think-tank in which she disses the 70-year-old UN refugee convention and does a nice bit of dog-whistling to her disreputable fellow-travellers about women and gay people seeking refuge too lightly. Cruella for PM! (which is clearly what she's after). Now Fishi Rishi has sanctioned drilling for oil in Rosebank, the biggest undeveloped oilfield in the North Sea - and stodgy Starmer has said he won't revoke the licence when he gets in. A disastrous Sunak decision, coming on top of his rowing back of other environmental policies last week, and one which Starmer could have stopped in its tracks. In the words of Corporal Fraser, we're all doomed... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 30 Sep 23 - 08:30 AM Short quote from this week's New European, from Tanit Koch's "Germanspaining" column:
.... I've never heard the problem with extremists stated so concisely before. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 23 - 02:24 AM So how do we translate that to UK politics? The far right groups we had here never had serious high poll ratings but they frightened the mainstream parties enough to move them further right than they have been in my voting lifetime. We now have a Labour Party that are vaguely pink, Liberals that align themselves with Tories and Tories that want to implement NF policies. How can we hope to recentre things? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 02 Oct 23 - 06:42 AM Populism is alive and well at the Tory conference, judging by Coutinho’s and Harper’s speeches - in particular, lots of Labour-slagging and Harper declaring the Conservative Party to be ‘The pro-car Party’. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:25 AM DtG the problem has been that for the last 13 years there has been a movement of the centre ground of politics increasingly to the right. We would all love to have radical socialist policies in place, but what was eft of centre 13 years ago are far left to where the political centre is now. Labour cannot regain power until it has reclaimed the centre-ground, and then, and only then, it can start to move the pendulum back towards the left. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:40 AM 100! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:45 AM Bugger! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 23 - 09:36 AM Labour can't "regain power." The Tories will lose power and Labour will carry on with all the current Tory policies. Labour's motto seems to be "drop a pledge a week." Starmer is what we used to call the despicable LibDems, i.e., Tory-lite. In his case, very lite-weight, no courage, no charisma, no vision, no principles. Saw a great slogan last night, can't remember where now, might have been in the comments section below the Spurs-Liverpool match (aka fiasco) report. It said (and pardon my French) "Fuck VAR and the Tories." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 03 Oct 23 - 06:37 AM HS2 - I wonder what the government are using it to distract us from? The vast majority of UK citizens will never travel on it and won’t be affected by it no matter where it runs to. Birmingham? Manchester? Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn (and I’d stake my pension that most UK residents don’t either)! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Oct 23 - 09:04 AM If you're 14 today you'll never legally be able to buy fags. Spot the hidden caveat in that sentence. And the Tories have overseen a cynical industry grooming kids to go vape-crazy. Never mind. All that saved HS2 money ("every penny of it") will be used to improve little bits of railways all over the place instead. Yeah, right, along with those 40 new hospitals. If HS2 had gone ahead, Labour would have carried on with it. Now that it's gone, Labour won't carry on with it. Be prepared for a massive Tory defeat, then nothing changes, then Cruella for PM in five years' time. Weeee! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 04 Oct 23 - 09:26 AM Steve: If you're 14 today you'll never legally be able to buy fags. Spot the hidden caveat in that sentence. I'm guessing the 'caveat' you mean is that word 'legally'. I'd rather spot the inaccuracy. If you're 14 now, but haven't yet had a birthday this year you were born before 1 Jan 2009, so can continue to buy cigarettes (once you're 18). The new law doesn't catch you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Oct 23 - 10:25 AM That indeed was it, Nigel. Underage kids have never had real issues getting their hands on fags or booze. I did both with gay abandon in my misspent yoof. I bought my first pint in a pub at 16 and I was wearing my full school uniform! It cost me 1s 11d by the way. In those days you could get 20 Players No 10 for half a crown. We'd buy a Watney's Party Four, take it down the park and bust the can open with a screwdriver. It was bloody 'orrible, flat as a witch's t*t. Pour it straight down the lav and cut out the middle man... The Tory cigarette thing and the ban-phones-in-schools thing are "good things" but they are deliberate petty sideshows. Typical Tory conference bullshit. I'm sure we'll see the same next week. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 05 Oct 23 - 04:10 AM This one tickles me. Just shows how out of touch they are with the North Tories promise Manchester a tram extension that already exists! My son #1, daughter in law #2 and grandson #2 were there protesting on Sunday. Proud of them all! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 05 Oct 23 - 12:35 PM If you are raiaing the legal age to buy cigarettes one year per year then in say 15 years you will need to be challenging people to prove they are 30 and not 29. I don't see how you are going to do that without some form of national ID system. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 05 Oct 23 - 02:27 PM Mrs. Backwoodsperson and I had exactly that conversation, and we both wondered if it’s the first step towards ID Cards? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Captain Swing Date: 05 Oct 23 - 03:44 PM I remember going on two school visits aged 15 in 5th yr (Y11 in today's money). One was to the Lincolnshire Show and the other was to see a production of Hamlet. We managed to get served with pints of brown ale on both occasions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Oct 23 - 06:16 PM This SNP/Labour thang. Good win, very impressive, etc. But... Is this a classic case of incumbents losing and challengers indulging in hubris? Tories: imploded for years, laughing stock, etc: lose their deposit. SNP: scandal over MP that had held the seat, broke covid law big-time, etc. Finance scandal over Nicola Sturgeon. No progress regarding independence push. Low turnout. Etc. Pundits are saying that this means Labour could get 40 Scottish seats. My arse. Not a chance. This was a by-election, a low-turnout protest vote. Blew the doors off, eh? More like found the wrong car key and had to go back in the house to look for the right one. Never a truer word was spoken: governments lose elections, oppositions don't win them. There's a lot of work to do. I'm still a Labour Party member, by the way. And there's a whole bunch of antisemitism inconvenience coming up that will hardly make the party top-dogs look good... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 07 Oct 23 - 02:13 PM The is a ry irritating form of punditry about. The first sentence warns you cannot read too much into a single by election result. Then every following sentence makes exactly that assumption. What I would say is the result is morale-boosting for Labour and morale-sapping for the SNP. I don't think I would go much further. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Oct 23 - 02:23 PM Agreed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 09 Oct 23 - 01:23 PM Something a bit intriguing happening. I can post messages to mudcat from my phone, but not from my PC. Obviously something antiviral is blocking me... Ehat I was going to say is the Labour Policy document makes interesting reading as far as setting the direction is concerned. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: peteglasgow Date: 16 Oct 23 - 10:10 AM i was a corbyn supporter but it was horrible canvassing for him in the last election in workington. i voted for starmer as leader - same policies (up the '19 manifesto!) plus electability. i've left the party (again - 3rd time. or maybe 4th) i;m now reduced to longing to see tory tears on election night and a hope for some decent policies. looks like we won't have a strong snp government as an inspiration either .all depressing |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Oct 23 - 08:12 PM We have a prime minister and a leader of the opposition who are both one hundred percent blinkered about the Israel/Hamas conflict. I have heard barely a single word of sympathy for the wretched and desperate people of Gaza from either of them. It's all the fault of Hamas, Israel has the right to defend itself, blah blah. It's not Hamas that has cut off water, food and fuel to the outdoor prison which is Gaza. It's not Hamas that has bombed hospitals and schools. It's not Hamas that has killed many hundreds of children and it's not Hamas that has created a million refugees. You don't need to do any of those things to unarmed civilians in order to "defend yourself." Sunak and Starmer are in the pockets of the pro-Israel lobby and they are frightened to death of saying anything that sounds even remotely like a glimmer of criticism of the Israeli regime. Starmer wouldn't even say that it's OK to sport a Palestinian flag in the street, a straight lift from the Suella Braverman near-fascist creed. That was in Starmer's interview with Nick Ferrari on LBC and I could hardly believe the pusillanimous self-deception I was hearing from the bloke who's probably going to be the next PM. Pathetic and totally unfair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Oct 23 - 08:50 AM Starmer's pusillanimous and unconditional support for Israel and his apparent lack of sympathy or at least his silence, for the plight of millions in Gaza is too much for me. The failure of western leaders to condemn and sanction the Israeli regime will give Netanyahu succour and they will be complicit in the future slaughter of civilians in Gaza. It's the last straw and I'm leaving the Labour Party. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 18 Oct 23 - 10:48 AM You're not leaving Labour Steve. I am not sure what it is but it sure ain't the party we joined! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 18 Oct 23 - 11:08 AM Starmer's letter to the councillors who have or are thinking of resigning over this |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Oct 23 - 12:00 PM I didn't manage to read all that as it wouldn't format for me, but I got the drift. Again, the platitudes flow freely but there is no condemnation of the horrors inflicted by Israel, just that by Hamas. Inexcusable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 20 Oct 23 - 05:08 PM In Sir Keith's own words, Steve. Talking about the by-election "I know there are people who probably voted Tory in the past who vote for a changed Labour Party this time because they despair at the state of their own party" Code for the Labour Party has become the Party that pissed off tories vote for :-( You are better off out of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Oct 23 - 05:19 PM He wouldn't let his ministers stand on health workers' picket lines, he told them that they mustn't join pro-Palestine demonstrations, he refused to back the nurses' and junior doctors' fight for fair pay. Now he refuses to criticise even the most egregious of Israel's outrages and he says they have every right to deny food and water to two million civilians, a war crime. That's not Labour and it's definitely not me. I've held my nose over several other of his swerves to the right, but I've had enough now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 25 Oct 23 - 10:49 AM > The first sentence warns you cannot read too much into a single by > election result. Then every following sentence makes exactly that > assumption. That's straight out of the "I'm not an unreasonable person but" book.* I heard many years ago that the trick is to read up to the "but", and take the inverse of what goes before it as the speaker's POV; the rest of the statement can then optionally be disregarded as too obvious to need to be stated. * It's a standard rhetorical technique. Fifty bonus points for correctly naming it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Oct 23 - 06:51 AM A below-the-line comment about Starmer in the Guardian: "If you say Israel 'has the right' to withhold power and water from Gaza then, a few days later, following a consequent outcry, say ‘it is not and never has been my view that Israel had the right to cut off water, food, fuel or medicines,’ you are revealing three things about yourself. You have appalling judgement, you are dishonest and you are a reactive, rather than a proactive, leader." I couldn't agree more. Starmer is the wrong leader for Labour and he'd be the wrong leader for this country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 29 Oct 23 - 03:57 PM I see that Bozzer has joined GB news Need I say more? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 30 Oct 23 - 10:49 AM The daily newsletter from Labour List, not exactly known for being leftie, is exceptionally critical of Starmer's stance on Gaza-Israel. I suppose the conflict could have receded into the background by the next election, but, if it hasn't, and he maintains his one-sided stance on the issue, he could lose an awful lot of Muslim votes, many of them up in northern towns which he has to win or win back. He's also at odds with the SNP and large numbers of Labour MPs as well as the mayors of London and Manchester. I note that Starmer is a member of Labour Friends of Israel, along with people such as Yvette Cooper, the disreputable Margaret Hodge, David Lammy, Wes Streeting and Emily Thornberry. And that 76% of the electorate want a ceasefire. I know it's not just about votes, but can we have at least just a bit of principle and humanity from a party that likes to think it's socialist? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 31 Oct 23 - 07:58 AM With the Covid enquiry well on the way, and the admission from political advisors that the government was so ill prepared, the least the pandemic could have done is waited until we had a competent government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 31 Oct 23 - 09:56 AM The lame-duck excuse I keep hearing from people like Starmer (and lots of Israeli big-shots and western leaders) is that we shouldn't have a ceasefire because we know that bastards like Hamas wouldn't stick to it anyway. Well blow me down. No giving peace a chance round 'ere, then... The reason Starmer and Sunak won't call for a ceasefire has nothing to do with that. They are both in the pockets of the US, and the reason the US won't call for a ceasefire is that it's in the pocket of Israel and the pro-Israel lobby. Call a ceasefire. Release all the hostages. Call off the collective punishment. Release the 5000 Palestinians who are in jail in Israel, a thousand or more held without charge, women, children, the lot. Then sit down and talk about it. If Paisley and McGuinness could do it, anyone can do it. I'm bloody sick of seeing the same outrages on me telly every night. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 31 Oct 23 - 03:30 PM Starmer is wriggling. He's trying to shut up the critics in his party by "criticising" Israel, a little bit. But still no ceasefire call. No principles on show here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 23 - 07:03 PM "David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary who visited the region last week, said that the “number of dead Palestinian civilians and children is shocking” as he called on Israel to take further steps to stop a “humanitarian catastrophe”. He said that Israel “must uphold international law” and also warned of violence in the West Bank." Talk about soft words. Why couldn't he say that Israel has been breaching international law for four weeks. Yes it's shocking. Yeah, David, how did we ever know that before you told us. Thanks for telling us what we already know in spades, David. Yes Israel should uphold international law. Thing is, Israel never does. But Lammy, a member of Labour Friends of Israel (aka a man in the pocket of the pro-Israel lobby) can't criticise Israel. His party leader will make sure of that. In a word, bollocks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 05 Nov 23 - 06:10 AM An excellent poem from Paul Cookson, on FB today. Says it all… ”Daily poem - Suella Braverman, once again the inspiration ... unfortunately LIFESTYLE CHOICE I could have escaped to the country I could have lived by the sea I could have chosen anywhere But this is the place for me Handy for all amenities In that I can rejoice This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice Yes to the freezing nights Yes to the driving rain And if I had to choose once more I’d choose the same again Yes to constant hunger Cold and always moist This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice I love my cardboard notice Asking for your charity I love the fact I can rely On other people’s sympathy These things you don’t understand While stuck in your Rolls Royce This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice This is not a style of life That I would recommend To my worst enemy Never mind a friend But you hear what you want to hear You cannot hear my voice This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice Your ignorance – deliberate Like the heartless views you voiced Indicative of where you are And your lifestyle choice Poem 1195 Sunday 5th November 2023” |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 23 - 06:34 AM The only reason I will (extremely reluctantly) hope for at least two Labour terms after the next election is that Braverman is not unlikely to be the next Tory leader. The woman is the nearest thing to being a true fascist we have in Parliament. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:36 AM Noticed that that piece of toxic proverbial had provided more proof the ALL tories and their supporters are racists, why else would it spout on about homeless people being mostly foreigners. did it personally check all their passports? What is the betting that the tory **** are too tight fisted to buy homes out of their own pockets to give homeless people a place to live rent free until they get back on their feet, and then pay an affordable rent. Where are the high streets with the rows and rows of tents? I haven't seen any, or is it referring to camp sites? Maybe it believes that homeless people should report for just be wiped of the face of the earth so that it doesn't have to look at the problem its party and the pathetic excuse for human skin that votes for it have created just because it lowers the value of their properties. There is no room for neo-n****m in my society, so as far as I am concern, every tory voter should be deported to some tin pot, extreme right dictatorship with appalling human rights where they can live happily amongst their own kind, and we can get back to being a decent, caring welcoming society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:37 AM I really should have just said what I really thought, rather than holding back just now |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 05 Nov 23 - 11:46 AM DIves and Lazarus “Thou are none of mine, brother Lazarus, Lying begging at my door, No meat, no drink, will I give thee, Nor bestow upon the poor.” Some things don't change much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:30 PM "The daily newsletter from Labour List, not exactly known for being leftie," The title alone would suggest that it is 'leftie', although possibly not sufficiently so for those with more extreme views. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:49 PM Try having a read of it, Nige. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Nov 23 - 05:28 AM Sorry, Nigel - I don't know where the 'ell that 'l' went...:-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 07 Nov 23 - 08:25 AM I'm sure that if I read 'Labour List' I would find it leftie even if not extremely so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Nov 23 - 09:32 AM Well read it and see. I'd put it at dead-centre Labour. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 07 Nov 23 - 12:48 PM I have no idea who Mark Park is, but if this is accurate it suggests that, despite all the claims Labour is tearing itself apart over the IreIsrael-Palestine, it has little or no effect on their lead. These surveys seem to have taken place before Cummings and co were questioned by the covid enquiry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 07 Nov 23 - 12:50 PM Damn! Forgot to close the link, and it seems to bring up adverts anyway. Try searching for the latest opinion polls and Mark Park had a table of about 8 of them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Nov 23 - 06:11 PM From a Guardian letter responding to suggestions that the marches on Armistice weekend should be called off, or even banned: ...I shall be marching for a small boy, surrounded by siblings, standing in the ruins of his neighbourhood whose cry, “We’ve done nothing wrong”, has so much more power and honesty than UK politicians who seek to divide us with their claims that the marches are “hate-filled” or “disrespectful”. I'm not big on hate, but I could so easily come to hate these sanctimonious, mealy-mouthed hypocrites who appear on our screens to criticise the marches straight after we've just watched the nightly routine of the horrors being visited on the civilians of Gaza who have done nothing wrong. The people who we commemorate on Armistice day died so that those of us who come after can enjoy democracy, our human rights and freedom of expression. A plague on the houses of those hypocrites. And please don't tell me that I'm not criticising Hamas or being fair to Israel. I've done that on every possible occasion in these threads, but my current gaze is on the plight of the benighted civilians of Gaza. That little boy is just one of thousands of children living or dying or being maimed for over a month in conditions that no child should have to endure, and we seem to have decided to be no more than spectators. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 10 Nov 23 - 05:56 AM For some reason, the original third verse in "All things bright and beautiful" tends to not appear in modern hymnals. It went:
Oh, and for completeness, my father used to leave in the verse ending
.... partly from simple mischief, and partly to see how many of the congregation engaged their brains while singing hymns. NB: No tents were harmed in the production of this comment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 11 Nov 23 - 11:54 AM It is looking like the pro-Palestine march in London has been very peaceful, despite the efforts of some anti-march protestors. Now the remaining risk is what happens as people try to leave the march and head home. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: robomatic Date: 11 Nov 23 - 03:06 PM Steve: Back to your lane. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Nov 23 - 04:27 PM I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Nov 23 - 04:39 PM Yes, DMcG. It seems most arrests were of right wing anti-protesters! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Nov 23 - 06:48 AM Sunak last night condemned the “violent, wholly unacceptable” scenes. He said both the far right and “Hamas sympathisers” had been responsible. Liar. There were no violent scenes on a march of around half a million people (a bit of difference-splitting there). There was serious violence at the cenotaph, caused by a bunch of right-wing extremists. Out of that half-million, the police are looking for a handful of people who might have had pro-Hamas regalia. Sunak went on to condemn "antisemitic chants," by which I assume he meant "from the river to the sea", which is not an antisemitic chant. It was one of the largest marches ever in this country and it was entirely peaceful, but our scumbag prime minister couldn't resist making a false equivalence in order to apportion blame for the trouble in London yesterday. Both he and Starmer are refusing to call for a ceasefire. Make no bones about it: they are simply giving the nod to Israel to carry on with the killing. Despicable. There they both were this morning at the cenotaph, honouring the dead yet refusing to call for a halt to the killing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Nov 23 - 12:51 PM I was about to make the same point. This government has gone beyond despicable and sadly taken the opposition down to their level Ah well. Just think how much worse things would have been with Corbyn in charge... :-S |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 12 Nov 23 - 01:07 PM "Both he (the Prime Minister) and Starmer are refusing to call for a ceasefire" Meanwhile, in other news in Wales: The (Labour led) Senedd has called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and Israel. The motion tabled in the Welsh parliament by Plaid Cymru urged for an end to "the appalling attacks on innocent civilians". Welsh government ministers abstained from the vote - but Labour backbenchers were given a free vote on the motion and on an amendment tabled by the Conservatives. From: Here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Nov 23 - 02:12 PM Thanks for that, Nigel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Nov 23 - 03:37 PM Nice to know that the land of my Fathers (Well, Mother's Mother) hasn't succumbed to the downward slide! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Nov 23 - 05:10 PM I see that Cruella has praised the police for "their professionalism in the face of violence and aggression from protesters and counter-protesters". She really is a piece of work isn't she. There are no words strong enough to describe the disdain I have for the shower of shits that are supposed to be running the country. How anyone can continue to support them is beyond me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Nov 23 - 07:29 PM It's the fake equivalence between 'protesters and counter-protesters" that gets me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 02:44 AM Exactly. And now praising the police because she realised that slagging them off was a bad career move. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 04:16 AM Ding dong the witch is dead... :-) Mind you, we cannot celebrate yet as we don't yet know who will replace her. Cameron, the man who screwed up over Brexit, has been seen entering number 10! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 04:18 AM Source BBC news BTW. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 13 Nov 23 - 04:43 AM The inappropriately-named James Cleverly also seen darkening the doorstep of No. 10 this morning. More barrel-bottom scraping, methinks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Nov 23 - 06:31 AM Cameron, a man who should never have been allowed anywhere near Downing Street ever again, fer chrissake... Put him in that big barge all on his own and float the bloody thing off to Rwanda. Anyone got a spare ball and chain? Anyone contemplating that he could well be the next Tory leader? :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 06:44 AM Cameron is back in Government. It bodes ill for conservatives in the future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Nov 23 - 07:03 AM How would you know? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 09:30 AM Cameron's post is minor but it reflects poorly to his opponents. Perhaps your conservatives are smarter than ours but I doubt it. What you call the wrong side of the Atlantic, over here the conservatives went too far and have splintered their base. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 09:45 AM Conservative with a big C is different to conservative with a little c Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:01 AM I reckon ah jus reflects the opinion of MSNBC. Jus sayin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:08 AM Over here we have a big D and a little d. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Doug Chadwick Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:20 AM Cameron's post is minor The Foreign Secretary is a senior position in the UK government. Along with the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Home Secretary, it is one of the four Great Offices of State. DC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:35 AM Thanks, I thought the Prime Minister was the only 'big boss'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Rain Dog Date: 13 Nov 23 - 11:10 AM Our Prime Minister is not the same as your President. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 13 Nov 23 - 11:27 AM This has been brewing for nearly a week: it seems it was the "tents" issue that pushed Rishi over the top, not Cruella being, erm, economical with the diplomacy about the marches (which just added the cherry). I await the front-page picture on this week's New European with interest, but it should feature Cruella's head poking out of a tent on the doorstep of Number Ten. For the record, at the time of typoing: * Cruella -> back benches * Cleverley -> Home Office * the boy Cameron -> Foreign Office * Theresa Coffey (sp?) -> back benches* ..... and more to follow. * Despite paying her respects to Larry the Cat on the way in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 07:02 PM We have what is now called an Imperial President. "Beware the demon pomposity". Bob Woodward. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Nov 23 - 08:22 AM We are allowed just one UK political thread. Keep your politics out of it, please. I hate Cameron. Hubris led to brexit, a terrible misjudgement. The architect of austerity ("we're all in it together"). Very dodgy lobbying. NHS starting to implode on his watch. Hardly any growth. Explosion of zero-hours contracts. Shat on the public sector via pay freeze after pay freeze. He did one excellent thing: he completely nobbled that shabby bunch of naive opportunists, the Lib Dems. However, he's a big hitter. He scrubs up well. He's not far right. From a Tory point of view, this isn't at all a bad move. Stodgy Starmer beware. And, after her showing on the Today programme this morning, for God's sake keep Rachel Reeves out of the spotlight. Could do worse than shutting Yvette up while he's at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Nov 23 - 09:09 AM It's Thérèse f'Coffey, Filk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 15 Nov 23 - 09:41 AM I poste dthis yesterday but it seems to have been lost in the latest cat litter cleanup. Apologies if it does appear twice Cruella is now telling Fishy that his policies are not working Funny. I'm sure she supported them until she was binned. Why on earth would she support something that she knew was not working? Not a career move surely ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 09:52 AM I watched the whole of the Supreme Court ruling this morning. What struck me was the fact that Rwanda's blatant failings to abide by previous agreed understandings on how asylum seekers should be treated, particularly with Israel, as well as a mass of solid evidence on this from the UN refugee agency, seem to have been ignored by this government. They were pursuing a doomed policy that has already cost taxpayers many millions of pounds. I feel like suing them to get my bloody money back. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 15 Nov 23 - 10:14 AM Herself's comment this morning: "That's typical of the Tories: no Plan B." My response: "Plan B is Plan A, shouted louder." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 15 Nov 23 - 01:00 PM I have posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating: So the new brilliant scheme is to get Parliament to say Rwanda is safe. Not to address the Supreme Court's judgement it is not, nor to ensure it is, nor to press Rwanda to be safer, but simply to call it so. Very Humpty Dumpty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 15 Nov 23 - 03:32 PM I can also say we are allowed just one US political thread so keep your politics out of it please but I agree with free speech with all its curses and benefits. Let's keep your personal animosities out of it. Comparing US reports to UK reports is sometimes different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 15 Nov 23 - 05:04 PM Passing a law stating that Rwanda is safe forcibly reminds me of the Indiana Pi Bill. I commend the Wikipedia page to you, but can't resist:
Happily, a real mathematician was in the building on other business, he educated members of the Indiana Senate, the bill was duly blocked, and the newspapers in other States ceased heaping ridicule on the Indiana State Legislature. Sadly, in our case, the grownups seem to have deserted the House of Commons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 05:48 PM Sunak is entering a minefield. His daft tough talk today reeks of his need to react sharply to the idiot Braverman, which he doesn't need to do. He ignored a mass of evidence from Israel and UNHCR that Rwanda does not comply with agreements as to how asylum seekers should be treated, and it's clear that "safe country" does not apply to Rwanda. That's one thing. But Starmer. As an opposition leader, as the leader of a party that's supposed to put ordinary people first, in contrast to self-serving Tories, why can't he call for a ceasefire? It's just a call. It's not a demand. It won't happen just because he calls for it. It would be a symbolic call only. It would, though, put clear blue water between Labour and the Tories. Instead, he clings to Sunak's coat tails. He runs scared of Biden should he beat Sunak in the election. He is not a leader. He's a follower. And his stance on the conflict is splitting the party. As any fule no, split parties always lose elections. So the next election is going to come down to who's more split, Labour or Tories. Sir K, it really doesn't need to be that way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 05:52 PM "I can also say we are allowed just one US political thread so keep your politics out of it please but I agree with free speech with all its curses and benefits. Let's keep your personal animosities out of it. Comparing US reports to UK reports is sometimes different." But the trouble is that you wade in but have absolutely no desire to discuss our politics. The simple reason for that is that you have not studied our politics and your posts show no understanding of it. By all means join in. By which I mean, join in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 06:40 PM Some Labour spokespeople I've heard today: Pat McFadden Yvette Cooper Keir Starmer Peter Kyle Rachel Reeves David Lammy Barry Gardiner (and others) All calling for no ceasefire. In other words, carry on the slaughter but do listen to our very mild cautions. All members of Labour Friends Of Israel. Then Jess Phillips. Feminist, anti-Corbynite. She left the front bench today in protest against the anti-ceasefire stance. She's also a member of Labour Friends of Israel. My opinion of her has soared. A real humanitarian. Kudos, Jess. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 18 Nov 23 - 04:14 AM BBC Four recently transmitted a programme made in 1998 called The Fifty Years War: Israel and the Arabs. It is well worth watching for the background to these events. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Nov 23 - 06:51 PM Gosh, didn't think that last post of mine had taken. I meant to add this comment from Jess's letter, with which I couldn't agree more. "I can see no route where the current military action does anything but put at risk the hope of peace and security for anyone in the region now and in the future." Absolutely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 19 Nov 23 - 08:16 AM Thank you Steve, I do have far more questions than opinion. I am monitoring British history from the Tudors to the Stuarts and as always listen to BBC. American history is a cinch compared to a thousand years of British history. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 19 Nov 23 - 09:00 AM UK's Online Safety Bill has become the Online Safety Act, complete with the section which states that the Forces of Law and Order shall be able to intercept any and all communications (the CSAM measure). The language carefully states that end-to-end encryption is not banned, but that intercepts shall be permitted once the technology exists to permit it. Since it's mathematically impossible for said technology to work as advertised, the Act has deemed (again) that black is white by legislative fiat. More at the The Shapeshifting Crypto Wars at the Lawfare site. Once I find the earlier article I've been paraphrasing, I'll post a link to that too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 20 Nov 23 - 10:49 PM As aforethreatened, analysis of clause 122 of the Online Safety Act: UK admits 'spy clause' can't be used for scanning encrypted chat – it's not 'feasible' UK Online Safety Bill to become law – and encryption busting clause is still there |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Captain Swing Date: 05 Oct 23 - 03:44 PM I remember going on two school visits aged 15 in 5th yr (Y11 in today's money). One was to the Lincolnshire Show and the other was to see a production of Hamlet. We managed to get served with pints of brown ale on both occasions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 23 - 02:24 AM So how do we translate that to UK politics? The far right groups we had here never had serious high poll ratings but they frightened the mainstream parties enough to move them further right than they have been in my voting lifetime. We now have a Labour Party that are vaguely pink, Liberals that align themselves with Tories and Tories that want to implement NF policies. How can we hope to recentre things? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:40 AM 100! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 05 Oct 23 - 04:10 AM This one tickles me. Just shows how out of touch they are with the North Tories promise Manchester a tram extension that already exists! My son #1, daughter in law #2 and grandson #2 were there protesting on Sunday. Proud of them all! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 18 Oct 23 - 10:48 AM You're not leaving Labour Steve. I am not sure what it is but it sure ain't the party we joined! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 20 Oct 23 - 05:08 PM In Sir Keith's own words, Steve. Talking about the by-election "I know there are people who probably voted Tory in the past who vote for a changed Labour Party this time because they despair at the state of their own party" Code for the Labour Party has become the Party that pissed off tories vote for :-( You are better off out of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 05 Oct 23 - 12:35 PM If you are raiaing the legal age to buy cigarettes one year per year then in say 15 years you will need to be challenging people to prove they are 30 and not 29. I don't see how you are going to do that without some form of national ID system. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 07 Oct 23 - 02:13 PM The is a ry irritating form of punditry about. The first sentence warns you cannot read too much into a single by election result. Then every following sentence makes exactly that assumption. What I would say is the result is morale-boosting for Labour and morale-sapping for the SNP. I don't think I would go much further. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 09 Oct 23 - 01:23 PM Something a bit intriguing happening. I can post messages to mudcat from my phone, but not from my PC. Obviously something antiviral is blocking me... Ehat I was going to say is the Labour Policy document makes interesting reading as far as setting the direction is concerned. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 18 Oct 23 - 11:08 AM Starmer's letter to the councillors who have or are thinking of resigning over this |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 04 Oct 23 - 09:26 AM Steve: If you're 14 today you'll never legally be able to buy fags. Spot the hidden caveat in that sentence. I'm guessing the 'caveat' you mean is that word 'legally'. I'd rather spot the inaccuracy. If you're 14 now, but haven't yet had a birthday this year you were born before 1 Jan 2009, so can continue to buy cigarettes (once you're 18). The new law doesn't catch you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 02 Oct 23 - 06:42 AM Populism is alive and well at the Tory conference, judging by Coutinho’s and Harper’s speeches - in particular, lots of Labour-slagging and Harper declaring the Conservative Party to be ‘The pro-car Party’. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:45 AM Bugger! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 03 Oct 23 - 06:37 AM HS2 - I wonder what the government are using it to distract us from? The vast majority of UK citizens will never travel on it and won’t be affected by it no matter where it runs to. Birmingham? Manchester? Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn (and I’d stake my pension that most UK residents don’t either)! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 05 Oct 23 - 02:27 PM Mrs. Backwoodsperson and I had exactly that conversation, and we both wondered if it’s the first step towards ID Cards? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Sep 23 - 11:03 AM Well still no planes full of refugees to Rwanda and still no asylum seekers on the barge. So Cruella goes to the US, gives a speech to a right-wing think-tank in which she disses the 70-year-old UN refugee convention and does a nice bit of dog-whistling to her disreputable fellow-travellers about women and gay people seeking refuge too lightly. Cruella for PM! (which is clearly what she's after). Now Fishi Rishi has sanctioned drilling for oil in Rosebank, the biggest undeveloped oilfield in the North Sea - and stodgy Starmer has said he won't revoke the licence when he gets in. A disastrous Sunak decision, coming on top of his rowing back of other environmental policies last week, and one which Starmer could have stopped in its tracks. In the words of Corporal Fraser, we're all doomed... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Oct 23 - 09:36 AM Labour can't "regain power." The Tories will lose power and Labour will carry on with all the current Tory policies. Labour's motto seems to be "drop a pledge a week." Starmer is what we used to call the despicable LibDems, i.e., Tory-lite. In his case, very lite-weight, no courage, no charisma, no vision, no principles. Saw a great slogan last night, can't remember where now, might have been in the comments section below the Spurs-Liverpool match (aka fiasco) report. It said (and pardon my French) "Fuck VAR and the Tories." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Oct 23 - 09:04 AM If you're 14 today you'll never legally be able to buy fags. Spot the hidden caveat in that sentence. And the Tories have overseen a cynical industry grooming kids to go vape-crazy. Never mind. All that saved HS2 money ("every penny of it") will be used to improve little bits of railways all over the place instead. Yeah, right, along with those 40 new hospitals. If HS2 had gone ahead, Labour would have carried on with it. Now that it's gone, Labour won't carry on with it. Be prepared for a massive Tory defeat, then nothing changes, then Cruella for PM in five years' time. Weeee! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Oct 23 - 10:25 AM That indeed was it, Nigel. Underage kids have never had real issues getting their hands on fags or booze. I did both with gay abandon in my misspent yoof. I bought my first pint in a pub at 16 and I was wearing my full school uniform! It cost me 1s 11d by the way. In those days you could get 20 Players No 10 for half a crown. We'd buy a Watney's Party Four, take it down the park and bust the can open with a screwdriver. It was bloody 'orrible, flat as a witch's t*t. Pour it straight down the lav and cut out the middle man... The Tory cigarette thing and the ban-phones-in-schools thing are "good things" but they are deliberate petty sideshows. Typical Tory conference bullshit. I'm sure we'll see the same next week. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Oct 23 - 06:16 PM This SNP/Labour thang. Good win, very impressive, etc. But... Is this a classic case of incumbents losing and challengers indulging in hubris? Tories: imploded for years, laughing stock, etc: lose their deposit. SNP: scandal over MP that had held the seat, broke covid law big-time, etc. Finance scandal over Nicola Sturgeon. No progress regarding independence push. Low turnout. Etc. Pundits are saying that this means Labour could get 40 Scottish seats. My arse. Not a chance. This was a by-election, a low-turnout protest vote. Blew the doors off, eh? More like found the wrong car key and had to go back in the house to look for the right one. Never a truer word was spoken: governments lose elections, oppositions don't win them. There's a lot of work to do. I'm still a Labour Party member, by the way. And there's a whole bunch of antisemitism inconvenience coming up that will hardly make the party top-dogs look good... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Oct 23 - 02:23 PM Agreed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Oct 23 - 08:12 PM We have a prime minister and a leader of the opposition who are both one hundred percent blinkered about the Israel/Hamas conflict. I have heard barely a single word of sympathy for the wretched and desperate people of Gaza from either of them. It's all the fault of Hamas, Israel has the right to defend itself, blah blah. It's not Hamas that has cut off water, food and fuel to the outdoor prison which is Gaza. It's not Hamas that has bombed hospitals and schools. It's not Hamas that has killed many hundreds of children and it's not Hamas that has created a million refugees. You don't need to do any of those things to unarmed civilians in order to "defend yourself." Sunak and Starmer are in the pockets of the pro-Israel lobby and they are frightened to death of saying anything that sounds even remotely like a glimmer of criticism of the Israeli regime. Starmer wouldn't even say that it's OK to sport a Palestinian flag in the street, a straight lift from the Suella Braverman near-fascist creed. That was in Starmer's interview with Nick Ferrari on LBC and I could hardly believe the pusillanimous self-deception I was hearing from the bloke who's probably going to be the next PM. Pathetic and totally unfair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Oct 23 - 08:50 AM Starmer's pusillanimous and unconditional support for Israel and his apparent lack of sympathy or at least his silence, for the plight of millions in Gaza is too much for me. The failure of western leaders to condemn and sanction the Israeli regime will give Netanyahu succour and they will be complicit in the future slaughter of civilians in Gaza. It's the last straw and I'm leaving the Labour Party. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Oct 23 - 12:00 PM I didn't manage to read all that as it wouldn't format for me, but I got the drift. Again, the platitudes flow freely but there is no condemnation of the horrors inflicted by Israel, just that by Hamas. Inexcusable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Oct 23 - 05:19 PM He wouldn't let his ministers stand on health workers' picket lines, he told them that they mustn't join pro-Palestine demonstrations, he refused to back the nurses' and junior doctors' fight for fair pay. Now he refuses to criticise even the most egregious of Israel's outrages and he says they have every right to deny food and water to two million civilians, a war crime. That's not Labour and it's definitely not me. I've held my nose over several other of his swerves to the right, but I've had enough now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: peteglasgow Date: 16 Oct 23 - 10:10 AM i was a corbyn supporter but it was horrible canvassing for him in the last election in workington. i voted for starmer as leader - same policies (up the '19 manifesto!) plus electability. i've left the party (again - 3rd time. or maybe 4th) i;m now reduced to longing to see tory tears on election night and a hope for some decent policies. looks like we won't have a strong snp government as an inspiration either .all depressing |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:25 AM DtG the problem has been that for the last 13 years there has been a movement of the centre ground of politics increasingly to the right. We would all love to have radical socialist policies in place, but what was eft of centre 13 years ago are far left to where the political centre is now. Labour cannot regain power until it has reclaimed the centre-ground, and then, and only then, it can start to move the pendulum back towards the left. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 30 Sep 23 - 08:30 AM Short quote from this week's New European, from Tanit Koch's "Germanspaining" column:
.... I've never heard the problem with extremists stated so concisely before. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 29 Oct 23 - 03:57 PM I see that Bozzer has joined GB news Need I say more? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Nov 23 - 04:39 PM Yes, DMcG. It seems most arrests were of right wing anti-protesters! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Nov 23 - 12:51 PM I was about to make the same point. This government has gone beyond despicable and sadly taken the opposition down to their level Ah well. Just think how much worse things would have been with Corbyn in charge... :-S |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Nov 23 - 03:37 PM Nice to know that the land of my Fathers (Well, Mother's Mother) hasn't succumbed to the downward slide! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Nov 23 - 05:10 PM I see that Cruella has praised the police for "their professionalism in the face of violence and aggression from protesters and counter-protesters". She really is a piece of work isn't she. There are no words strong enough to describe the disdain I have for the shower of shits that are supposed to be running the country. How anyone can continue to support them is beyond me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 02:44 AM Exactly. And now praising the police because she realised that slagging them off was a bad career move. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 04:16 AM Ding dong the witch is dead... :-) Mind you, we cannot celebrate yet as we don't yet know who will replace her. Cameron, the man who screwed up over Brexit, has been seen entering number 10! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 04:18 AM Source BBC news BTW. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Nov 23 - 09:45 AM Conservative with a big C is different to conservative with a little c Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 15 Nov 23 - 09:41 AM I poste dthis yesterday but it seems to have been lost in the latest cat litter cleanup. Apologies if it does appear twice Cruella is now telling Fishy that his policies are not working Funny. I'm sure she supported them until she was binned. Why on earth would she support something that she knew was not working? Not a career move surely ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: robomatic Date: 11 Nov 23 - 03:06 PM Steve: Back to your lane. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 06:44 AM Cameron is back in Government. It bodes ill for conservatives in the future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 09:30 AM Cameron's post is minor but it reflects poorly to his opponents. Perhaps your conservatives are smarter than ours but I doubt it. What you call the wrong side of the Atlantic, over here the conservatives went too far and have splintered their base. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:01 AM I reckon ah jus reflects the opinion of MSNBC. Jus sayin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:08 AM Over here we have a big D and a little d. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:35 AM Thanks, I thought the Prime Minister was the only 'big boss'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 13 Nov 23 - 07:02 PM We have what is now called an Imperial President. "Beware the demon pomposity". Bob Woodward. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 15 Nov 23 - 03:32 PM I can also say we are allowed just one US political thread so keep your politics out of it please but I agree with free speech with all its curses and benefits. Let's keep your personal animosities out of it. Comparing US reports to UK reports is sometimes different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Donuel Date: 19 Nov 23 - 08:16 AM Thank you Steve, I do have far more questions than opinion. I am monitoring British history from the Tudors to the Stuarts and as always listen to BBC. American history is a cinch compared to a thousand years of British history. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 05 Nov 23 - 11:46 AM DIves and Lazarus “Thou are none of mine, brother Lazarus, Lying begging at my door, No meat, no drink, will I give thee, Nor bestow upon the poor.” Some things don't change much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 07 Nov 23 - 12:48 PM I have no idea who Mark Park is, but if this is accurate it suggests that, despite all the claims Labour is tearing itself apart over the IreIsrael-Palestine, it has little or no effect on their lead. These surveys seem to have taken place before Cummings and co were questioned by the covid enquiry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 07 Nov 23 - 12:50 PM Damn! Forgot to close the link, and it seems to bring up adverts anyway. Try searching for the latest opinion polls and Mark Park had a table of about 8 of them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 11 Nov 23 - 11:54 AM It is looking like the pro-Palestine march in London has been very peaceful, despite the efforts of some anti-march protestors. Now the remaining risk is what happens as people try to leave the march and head home. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 15 Nov 23 - 01:00 PM I have posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating: So the new brilliant scheme is to get Parliament to say Rwanda is safe. Not to address the Supreme Court's judgement it is not, nor to ensure it is, nor to press Rwanda to be safer, but simply to call it so. Very Humpty Dumpty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: DMcG Date: 18 Nov 23 - 04:14 AM BBC Four recently transmitted a programme made in 1998 called The Fifty Years War: Israel and the Arabs. It is well worth watching for the background to these events. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Doug Chadwick Date: 13 Nov 23 - 10:20 AM Cameron's post is minor The Foreign Secretary is a senior position in the UK government. Along with the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Home Secretary, it is one of the four Great Offices of State. DC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:30 PM "The daily newsletter from Labour List, not exactly known for being leftie," The title alone would suggest that it is 'leftie', although possibly not sufficiently so for those with more extreme views. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 07 Nov 23 - 08:25 AM I'm sure that if I read 'Labour List' I would find it leftie even if not extremely so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 12 Nov 23 - 01:07 PM "Both he (the Prime Minister) and Starmer are refusing to call for a ceasefire" Meanwhile, in other news in Wales: The (Labour led) Senedd has called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and Israel. The motion tabled in the Welsh parliament by Plaid Cymru urged for an end to "the appalling attacks on innocent civilians". Welsh government ministers abstained from the vote - but Labour backbenchers were given a free vote on the motion and on an amendment tabled by the Conservatives. From: Here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Rain Dog Date: 13 Nov 23 - 11:10 AM Our Prime Minister is not the same as your President. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 05 Nov 23 - 06:10 AM An excellent poem from Paul Cookson, on FB today. Says it all… ”Daily poem - Suella Braverman, once again the inspiration ... unfortunately LIFESTYLE CHOICE I could have escaped to the country I could have lived by the sea I could have chosen anywhere But this is the place for me Handy for all amenities In that I can rejoice This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice Yes to the freezing nights Yes to the driving rain And if I had to choose once more I’d choose the same again Yes to constant hunger Cold and always moist This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice I love my cardboard notice Asking for your charity I love the fact I can rely On other people’s sympathy These things you don’t understand While stuck in your Rolls Royce This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice This is not a style of life That I would recommend To my worst enemy Never mind a friend But you hear what you want to hear You cannot hear my voice This tent in a high street doorway That’s my lifestyle choice Your ignorance – deliberate Like the heartless views you voiced Indicative of where you are And your lifestyle choice Poem 1195 Sunday 5th November 2023” |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 13 Nov 23 - 04:43 AM The inappropriately-named James Cleverly also seen darkening the doorstep of No. 10 this morning. More barrel-bottom scraping, methinks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Oct 23 - 06:51 AM A below-the-line comment about Starmer in the Guardian: "If you say Israel 'has the right' to withhold power and water from Gaza then, a few days later, following a consequent outcry, say ‘it is not and never has been my view that Israel had the right to cut off water, food, fuel or medicines,’ you are revealing three things about yourself. You have appalling judgement, you are dishonest and you are a reactive, rather than a proactive, leader." I couldn't agree more. Starmer is the wrong leader for Labour and he'd be the wrong leader for this country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 30 Oct 23 - 10:49 AM The daily newsletter from Labour List, not exactly known for being leftie, is exceptionally critical of Starmer's stance on Gaza-Israel. I suppose the conflict could have receded into the background by the next election, but, if it hasn't, and he maintains his one-sided stance on the issue, he could lose an awful lot of Muslim votes, many of them up in northern towns which he has to win or win back. He's also at odds with the SNP and large numbers of Labour MPs as well as the mayors of London and Manchester. I note that Starmer is a member of Labour Friends of Israel, along with people such as Yvette Cooper, the disreputable Margaret Hodge, David Lammy, Wes Streeting and Emily Thornberry. And that 76% of the electorate want a ceasefire. I know it's not just about votes, but can we have at least just a bit of principle and humanity from a party that likes to think it's socialist? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 31 Oct 23 - 09:56 AM The lame-duck excuse I keep hearing from people like Starmer (and lots of Israeli big-shots and western leaders) is that we shouldn't have a ceasefire because we know that bastards like Hamas wouldn't stick to it anyway. Well blow me down. No giving peace a chance round 'ere, then... The reason Starmer and Sunak won't call for a ceasefire has nothing to do with that. They are both in the pockets of the US, and the reason the US won't call for a ceasefire is that it's in the pocket of Israel and the pro-Israel lobby. Call a ceasefire. Release all the hostages. Call off the collective punishment. Release the 5000 Palestinians who are in jail in Israel, a thousand or more held without charge, women, children, the lot. Then sit down and talk about it. If Paisley and McGuinness could do it, anyone can do it. I'm bloody sick of seeing the same outrages on me telly every night. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 31 Oct 23 - 03:30 PM Starmer is wriggling. He's trying to shut up the critics in his party by "criticising" Israel, a little bit. But still no ceasefire call. No principles on show here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 04 Nov 23 - 07:03 PM "David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary who visited the region last week, said that the “number of dead Palestinian civilians and children is shocking” as he called on Israel to take further steps to stop a “humanitarian catastrophe”. He said that Israel “must uphold international law” and also warned of violence in the West Bank." Talk about soft words. Why couldn't he say that Israel has been breaching international law for four weeks. Yes it's shocking. Yeah, David, how did we ever know that before you told us. Thanks for telling us what we already know in spades, David. Yes Israel should uphold international law. Thing is, Israel never does. But Lammy, a member of Labour Friends of Israel (aka a man in the pocket of the pro-Israel lobby) can't criticise Israel. His party leader will make sure of that. In a word, bollocks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 23 - 06:34 AM The only reason I will (extremely reluctantly) hope for at least two Labour terms after the next election is that Braverman is not unlikely to be the next Tory leader. The woman is the nearest thing to being a true fascist we have in Parliament. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:49 PM Try having a read of it, Nige. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Nov 23 - 05:28 AM Sorry, Nigel - I don't know where the 'ell that 'l' went...:-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Nov 23 - 09:32 AM Well read it and see. I'd put it at dead-centre Labour. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Nov 23 - 06:11 PM From a Guardian letter responding to suggestions that the marches on Armistice weekend should be called off, or even banned: ...I shall be marching for a small boy, surrounded by siblings, standing in the ruins of his neighbourhood whose cry, “We’ve done nothing wrong”, has so much more power and honesty than UK politicians who seek to divide us with their claims that the marches are “hate-filled” or “disrespectful”. I'm not big on hate, but I could so easily come to hate these sanctimonious, mealy-mouthed hypocrites who appear on our screens to criticise the marches straight after we've just watched the nightly routine of the horrors being visited on the civilians of Gaza who have done nothing wrong. The people who we commemorate on Armistice day died so that those of us who come after can enjoy democracy, our human rights and freedom of expression. A plague on the houses of those hypocrites. And please don't tell me that I'm not criticising Hamas or being fair to Israel. I've done that on every possible occasion in these threads, but my current gaze is on the plight of the benighted civilians of Gaza. That little boy is just one of thousands of children living or dying or being maimed for over a month in conditions that no child should have to endure, and we seem to have decided to be no more than spectators. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 11 Nov 23 - 04:27 PM I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Nov 23 - 06:48 AM Sunak last night condemned the “violent, wholly unacceptable” scenes. He said both the far right and “Hamas sympathisers” had been responsible. Liar. There were no violent scenes on a march of around half a million people (a bit of difference-splitting there). There was serious violence at the cenotaph, caused by a bunch of right-wing extremists. Out of that half-million, the police are looking for a handful of people who might have had pro-Hamas regalia. Sunak went on to condemn "antisemitic chants," by which I assume he meant "from the river to the sea", which is not an antisemitic chant. It was one of the largest marches ever in this country and it was entirely peaceful, but our scumbag prime minister couldn't resist making a false equivalence in order to apportion blame for the trouble in London yesterday. Both he and Starmer are refusing to call for a ceasefire. Make no bones about it: they are simply giving the nod to Israel to carry on with the killing. Despicable. There they both were this morning at the cenotaph, honouring the dead yet refusing to call for a halt to the killing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Nov 23 - 02:12 PM Thanks for that, Nigel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Nov 23 - 07:29 PM It's the fake equivalence between 'protesters and counter-protesters" that gets me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Nov 23 - 06:31 AM Cameron, a man who should never have been allowed anywhere near Downing Street ever again, fer chrissake... Put him in that big barge all on his own and float the bloody thing off to Rwanda. Anyone got a spare ball and chain? Anyone contemplating that he could well be the next Tory leader? :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Nov 23 - 07:03 AM How would you know? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Nov 23 - 08:22 AM We are allowed just one UK political thread. Keep your politics out of it, please. I hate Cameron. Hubris led to brexit, a terrible misjudgement. The architect of austerity ("we're all in it together"). Very dodgy lobbying. NHS starting to implode on his watch. Hardly any growth. Explosion of zero-hours contracts. Shat on the public sector via pay freeze after pay freeze. He did one excellent thing: he completely nobbled that shabby bunch of naive opportunists, the Lib Dems. However, he's a big hitter. He scrubs up well. He's not far right. From a Tory point of view, this isn't at all a bad move. Stodgy Starmer beware. And, after her showing on the Today programme this morning, for God's sake keep Rachel Reeves out of the spotlight. Could do worse than shutting Yvette up while he's at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Nov 23 - 09:09 AM It's Thérèse f'Coffey, Filk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 09:52 AM I watched the whole of the Supreme Court ruling this morning. What struck me was the fact that Rwanda's blatant failings to abide by previous agreed understandings on how asylum seekers should be treated, particularly with Israel, as well as a mass of solid evidence on this from the UN refugee agency, seem to have been ignored by this government. They were pursuing a doomed policy that has already cost taxpayers many millions of pounds. I feel like suing them to get my bloody money back. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 05:48 PM Sunak is entering a minefield. His daft tough talk today reeks of his need to react sharply to the idiot Braverman, which he doesn't need to do. He ignored a mass of evidence from Israel and UNHCR that Rwanda does not comply with agreements as to how asylum seekers should be treated, and it's clear that "safe country" does not apply to Rwanda. That's one thing. But Starmer. As an opposition leader, as the leader of a party that's supposed to put ordinary people first, in contrast to self-serving Tories, why can't he call for a ceasefire? It's just a call. It's not a demand. It won't happen just because he calls for it. It would be a symbolic call only. It would, though, put clear blue water between Labour and the Tories. Instead, he clings to Sunak's coat tails. He runs scared of Biden should he beat Sunak in the election. He is not a leader. He's a follower. And his stance on the conflict is splitting the party. As any fule no, split parties always lose elections. So the next election is going to come down to who's more split, Labour or Tories. Sir K, it really doesn't need to be that way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 05:52 PM "I can also say we are allowed just one US political thread so keep your politics out of it please but I agree with free speech with all its curses and benefits. Let's keep your personal animosities out of it. Comparing US reports to UK reports is sometimes different." But the trouble is that you wade in but have absolutely no desire to discuss our politics. The simple reason for that is that you have not studied our politics and your posts show no understanding of it. By all means join in. By which I mean, join in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Nov 23 - 06:40 PM Some Labour spokespeople I've heard today: Pat McFadden Yvette Cooper Keir Starmer Peter Kyle Rachel Reeves David Lammy Barry Gardiner (and others) All calling for no ceasefire. In other words, carry on the slaughter but do listen to our very mild cautions. All members of Labour Friends Of Israel. Then Jess Phillips. Feminist, anti-Corbynite. She left the front bench today in protest against the anti-ceasefire stance. She's also a member of Labour Friends of Israel. My opinion of her has soared. A real humanitarian. Kudos, Jess. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 18 Nov 23 - 06:51 PM Gosh, didn't think that last post of mine had taken. I meant to add this comment from Jess's letter, with which I couldn't agree more. "I can see no route where the current military action does anything but put at risk the hope of peace and security for anyone in the region now and in the future." Absolutely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 31 Oct 23 - 07:58 AM With the Covid enquiry well on the way, and the admission from political advisors that the government was so ill prepared, the least the pandemic could have done is waited until we had a competent government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:36 AM Noticed that that piece of toxic proverbial had provided more proof the ALL tories and their supporters are racists, why else would it spout on about homeless people being mostly foreigners. did it personally check all their passports? What is the betting that the tory **** are too tight fisted to buy homes out of their own pockets to give homeless people a place to live rent free until they get back on their feet, and then pay an affordable rent. Where are the high streets with the rows and rows of tents? I haven't seen any, or is it referring to camp sites? Maybe it believes that homeless people should report for just be wiped of the face of the earth so that it doesn't have to look at the problem its party and the pathetic excuse for human skin that votes for it have created just because it lowers the value of their properties. There is no room for neo-n****m in my society, so as far as I am concern, every tory voter should be deported to some tin pot, extreme right dictatorship with appalling human rights where they can live happily amongst their own kind, and we can get back to being a decent, caring welcoming society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 05 Nov 23 - 08:37 AM I really should have just said what I really thought, rather than holding back just now |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 25 Oct 23 - 10:49 AM > The first sentence warns you cannot read too much into a single by > election result. Then every following sentence makes exactly that > assumption. That's straight out of the "I'm not an unreasonable person but" book.* I heard many years ago that the trick is to read up to the "but", and take the inverse of what goes before it as the speaker's POV; the rest of the statement can then optionally be disregarded as too obvious to need to be stated. * It's a standard rhetorical technique. Fifty bonus points for correctly naming it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 10 Nov 23 - 05:56 AM For some reason, the original third verse in "All things bright and beautiful" tends to not appear in modern hymnals. It went:
Oh, and for completeness, my father used to leave in the verse ending
.... partly from simple mischief, and partly to see how many of the congregation engaged their brains while singing hymns. NB: No tents were harmed in the production of this comment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 13 Nov 23 - 11:27 AM This has been brewing for nearly a week: it seems it was the "tents" issue that pushed Rishi over the top, not Cruella being, erm, economical with the diplomacy about the marches (which just added the cherry). I await the front-page picture on this week's New European with interest, but it should feature Cruella's head poking out of a tent on the doorstep of Number Ten. For the record, at the time of typoing: * Cruella -> back benches * Cleverley -> Home Office * the boy Cameron -> Foreign Office * Theresa Coffey (sp?) -> back benches* ..... and more to follow. * Despite paying her respects to Larry the Cat on the way in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 15 Nov 23 - 10:14 AM Herself's comment this morning: "That's typical of the Tories: no Plan B." My response: "Plan B is Plan A, shouted louder." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 15 Nov 23 - 05:04 PM Passing a law stating that Rwanda is safe forcibly reminds me of the Indiana Pi Bill. I commend the Wikipedia page to you, but can't resist:
Happily, a real mathematician was in the building on other business, he educated members of the Indiana Senate, the bill was duly blocked, and the newspapers in other States ceased heaping ridicule on the Indiana State Legislature. Sadly, in our case, the grownups seem to have deserted the House of Commons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 19 Nov 23 - 09:00 AM UK's Online Safety Bill has become the Online Safety Act, complete with the section which states that the Forces of Law and Order shall be able to intercept any and all communications (the CSAM measure). The language carefully states that end-to-end encryption is not banned, but that intercepts shall be permitted once the technology exists to permit it. Since it's mathematically impossible for said technology to work as advertised, the Act has deemed (again) that black is white by legislative fiat. More at the The Shapeshifting Crypto Wars at the Lawfare site. Once I find the earlier article I've been paraphrasing, I'll post a link to that too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Nov 23 - 07:43 AM Legislation saying that if something currently impossible becomes possible other things that are currently impossible will be legal is rational enough, even if it's a bit nonsensical. Like saying if pigs could fly air traffic control would need to be modified to prevent accidents. It's not like passing a law saying that from now on throwing people over a cliff is safe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: MaJoC the Filk Date: 27 Nov 23 - 09:12 AM > Like saying if pigs could fly air traffic control would need > to be modified to prevent accidents. It's slightly worse than that. The precise wording of the |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Dec 23 - 07:35 PM Well, if anyone is still in doubt about Starmer's socialist credentials, he's blown them out of the water now by praising Thatcher. From the Sunday Telegraph (!) via the Guardian: Keir Starmer has praised Margaret Thatcher for effecting “meaningful change” in Britain in an article directly appealing to Conservative voters to switch to Labour. Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the Labour leader said Thatcher had “set loose our natural entrepreneurialism” during her time as prime minister. I can scarcely bring myself to say more. Except that I've been bloody telling you about him, haven't I? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 03 Dec 23 - 03:46 AM He said a lot more than that, didn’t he? Here’s a link to the whole Guardian piece, And another to the Telegraph article, so people can read the whole thing and form their own impressions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Dec 23 - 04:42 AM You can't read the Telegraph piece unless you subscribe (I'd sooner hack off the family jewels with a rusty machete, frankly), and the Guardian piece says what I quoted and very little more. In other words, your "links" are next to useless except to dyed-in-the-wool Torygraph aficionados. Instead, I recommend a listen to Paddy O'Connell giving Starmer a rather uncomfortable grilling on Broadcasting House on Radio 4 this morning. I'm trusting the capable readers of this thread to find that for themselves. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Backwoodsman Date: 03 Dec 23 - 11:43 AM ”You can't read the Telegraph piece unless you subscribe” Nonsense. I don’t subscribe and I read it. As I’ve told you several times now, rather than rely on your frequently edited C&Ps, I prefer to read the source material and form my own opinions. I can only guess at the true reason for your obstinacy in refusing to give links to your sources. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Dec 23 - 12:10 PM Keep guessing. Perhaps you have a conspiracy theory about me. I almost feel honoured. Well you must have magic powers because I couldn't get past the second line of that piece. Anyway, do you have an opinion of Starmer's praising of Thatcher or would you rather discuss further why I don't do links as good as your last two? :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Geoff Wallis Date: 03 Dec 23 - 12:22 PM It's definitely not nonsense. The Bellylaugh's Starmer interview is for subscribers only. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3 From: Rain Dog Date: 03 Dec 23 - 02:42 PM I followed the link and was able to read the Telegraph piece. Just had to keep scrolling down. I am not a subscriber to The Telegraph. |
