Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One thing’s for sure – Henry Bolton’s name awareness has soare

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited January 23 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One thing’s for sure – Henry Bolton’s name awareness has soared

I quite like the 11/4 that he’ll hang on – after all Farage is on his side and the party doesn’t have an abundance of talent.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 18,494
    First?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 18,494
    I thought Farage was a bit equivocal this morning on R4. It wouldn’t take much for him to switch. He’s not a guy you would want beside you in the trenches.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,186
    I find nothing at all impressive with his refusal to see that he has lost the confidence of his colleagues. Bloodymindedness is not impressive. Having the support of Farage is not what it was and each day Bolton remains leader, the closer UKIP comes to oblivion.

    They are going to be a mess whoever is leader in a few weeks. But Bolton is tarnishing what is left of the UKIP brand and his refusal to see that is deeply unimpressive.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    I supose it all depends if having a "socially conservative" girlfriend counts as a plus or a minus with the UKIP members. Not clear cut!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,530
    Bolton Mean's Bolton.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,549
    Foxy said:

    I supose it all depends if having a "socially conservative" girlfriend counts as a plus or a minus with the UKIP members. Not clear cut!

    She seems more socially, err, nationalist to me.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,610

    I find nothing at all impressive with his refusal to see that he has lost the confidence of his colleagues. Bloodymindedness is not impressive. Having the support of Farage is not what it was and each day Bolton remains leader, the closer UKIP comes to oblivion.

    They are going to be a mess whoever is leader in a few weeks. But Bolton is tarnishing what is left of the UKIP brand and his refusal to see that is deeply unimpressive.

    Of course if he hangs on this might blow over and be largely forgotten, albeit leaving UKIP with a potentially embarrassing story to be brought up at election time.

    Yet another leadership election would in itself be damaging to the UKIP brand. It would also bring some colourful characters to the fore once more and the wrong person winning would be the final nail in the purple coffin.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 18,494
    He’s certainly getting a lot more attention than that semi retired dancer in charge of the Limp Dems. You know, the one with the big weapon.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    I supose it all depends if having a "socially conservative" girlfriend counts as a plus or a minus with the UKIP members. Not clear cut!

    She seems more socially, err, nationalist to me.
    As long as she cleans behind the fridge, who cares?
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,186
    Essexit said:

    I find nothing at all impressive with his refusal to see that he has lost the confidence of his colleagues. Bloodymindedness is not impressive. Having the support of Farage is not what it was and each day Bolton remains leader, the closer UKIP comes to oblivion.

    They are going to be a mess whoever is leader in a few weeks. But Bolton is tarnishing what is left of the UKIP brand and his refusal to see that is deeply unimpressive.

    Of course if he hangs on this might blow over and be largely forgotten, albeit leaving UKIP with a potentially embarrassing story to be brought up at election time.

    Yet another leadership election would in itself be damaging to the UKIP brand. It would also bring some colourful characters to the fore once more and the wrong person winning would be the final nail in the purple coffin.
    But it won't be forgotten. He will always be the man who shagged a woman half his age who turned out to be a racist and then he lost control of the party.

    He doesn't have a strong track record before winning the leadership of any electoral or political success. So all he is known for is for this embarrassment.

    Yes, there is a risk of UKIP finding an even worse new leader. But they won't recover with Bolton at the helm. The risk is one that UKIP has to take.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,872
    All a bit pointless. The "Guardians of Brexit " role is being done by people in the Tory Party, some of them in the Cabinet.
    Other policies, such as spending more on defence and NHS and radically cutting immigration are equally well served in the higher reaches of Conservatives.
    Only future now is as BNP or BNP lite. There is simply no other space on the political spectrum remaining for them.
  • TomsToms Posts: 1,471
    DavidL said:

    I thought Farage was a bit equivocal this morning on R4. It wouldn’t take much for him to switch. He’s not a guy you would want beside you in the trenches.

    Or not, as General Montgomery once said of Mao, someone he "would have been happy to go into the jungle with."
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,668
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Bolton Mean's Bolton.

    I think he’s Bolton the stable door too late...
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289
    Scott_P said:
    This is embarrassing shit from the Nats. Makes them look like a more neurotic and loser-y version of UKIP. Fail.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,487
    Scott_P said:
    Why should there be a ward just for popular children?
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289
    Bit of journalistic gossip. Just been to a party full of hacks.

    A *certain* Guardian editor - in one specific genre - told me that what they run, or don't run, as a story, is now pretty much ruled by "how it will be received on social media". i.e. if they fear it will be shot down on Twitter, they don't run it. End of.

    Extraordinary.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,892
    DavidL said:

    I thought Farage was a bit equivocal this morning on R4. It wouldn’t take much for him to switch. He’s not a guy you would want beside you in the trenches.

    Bolton OTOH might be useful in the trenches.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289
    edited January 23

    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.
  • PBModeratorPBModerator Posts: 619
    Pong, your comment is libellous and could get OGH into trouble, please don't repeat it.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 20,877
    Two new German polls put the Social Democrats on 17% and 18%.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,010
    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Worse things happen at Sea.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,018
    edited January 23
    Trumpton

    Memos to Boris Johnson.

    In a remarkable attempt to bolster the claim, quoted by one or two of Trump's team, that the Obama administration asked the UK Intelligence to spy on Donald Trump and the Trump Organisation, a letter has been released into the wilds of social media.

    This note, apparently addressed to Boris Johnson by an official in GCHQ talks about the request to spy on Donald and requests an approval for this effort to be continued for 90 days.

    Unfortunately it insists on mentioning some guy called Michael Steele, we assume they cant get Chris Steele's name right, he of the infamous dossier. Nor is his job title correct (which is a huge error), nor the organisation he worked for. Most of all, GCHQ routinely monitor key target comms out of the US, they don't write to the Foreign Secretary to get approval. Trump had come to the attention of Western intelligence including UK bodies years ago.

    In short, it looks fake. Question is, who is producing this stuff and why? There is an obsession amongst Trump supporters about Steele's work but whilst large slices of its output are credible (some of it is anecdote not fact) , its nothing that Western intelligence didn't know.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 4,334
    Can't help feeling there's a Bolton Defiant pun going missing somewhere...

    ... nickname Daffy:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,563
    AndyJS said:

    Two new German polls put the Social Democrats on 17% and 18%.

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm

    Not quite the whole story, though. Another poll has SPD at 20%. The most recent poll shows CDU/CSU falling even further than their disastrous Bundestag election vote (down to 31.5% with INSA).

    The main "winners" so far are AfD up to 14% and Die Linke at 11%. The INSA poll has the extraordinary statistic of the combined CDU/CSU/SPD falling below 50% which is unprecedented. The next four parties all share 45% between them which is again remarkable.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,563
    Evening all :)

    Have to say it's fascinating hearing some on here talking up the Sterling/US Dollar rate as though it's some magical totem and the return to near $1.40 to the £ a sign of "Brexit" being a success.

    Looking at the rates against the Euro and currencies like the Australian Dollar tell a very different story - the immediate post-EU Referendum falls have remained and not been reversed so as always more than one side to any and every story.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289
    edited January 23
    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    Whatever. Thousands of girls in the UK are genitally mutilated every year - literally flown out to be clitorally mutilated, during the "cutting season" - and we have zero - ZERO - prosecutions. And the police do nothing. Not a single conviction.

    Then a few white rich middle age boors behave like average boors - OMG, hands up skirts! - and its front page on the FT??

    Spare me. Feminism is diseased. Like Socialism.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,872
    edited January 23
    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    @dixiedean

    Indeed. The only complaint really ought to be the poor pay for dealing with a room full of pissed up twats.

  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 265
    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    They are not "girls"...but women.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 6,404
    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,685
    edited January 23

    Pong, your comment is libellous and could get OGH into trouble, please don't repeat it.

    ok, i'll shut up.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 6,404
    edited January 23
    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 6,404
    edited January 23
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could you think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Misogyny Club lives...
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289
    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Misogyny Club lives...
    Brilliant. Screengrab it and frame it.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 6,404
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Throwing your toys out the pram. Oh dear. I feel sorry for you.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,690

    Scott_P said:
    Why should there be a ward just for popular children?
    They are the ones who play doctors and nurses??
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 4,334
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Whataboutery and personal abuse seem to be the limits of your argument.
    Doesn't constitute a win.

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,530
    Y0kel said:

    Trumpton

    Memos to Boris Johnson.

    In a remarkable attempt to bolster the claim, quoted by one or two of Trump's team, that the Obama administration asked the UK Intelligence to spy on Donald Trump and the Trump Organisation, a letter has been released into the wilds of social media.

    This note, apparently addressed to Boris Johnson by an official in GCHQ talks about the request to spy on Donald and requests an approval for this effort to be continued for 90 days.

    Unfortunately it insists on mentioning some guy called Michael Steele, we assume they cant get Chris Steele's name right, he of the infamous dossier. Nor is his job title correct (which is a huge error), nor the organisation he worked for. Most of all, GCHQ routinely monitor key target comms out of the US, they don't write to the Foreign Secretary to get approval. Trump had come to the attention of Western intelligence including UK bodies years ago.

    In short, it looks fake. Question is, who is producing this stuff and why? There is an obsession amongst Trump supporters about Steele's work but whilst large slices of its output are credible (some of it is anecdote not fact) , its nothing that Western intelligence didn't know.

    I seriously doubt anyone with a genuine inside track on this stuff, would be posting about it on here. Poor tradecraft, we'd have called it in my day at the Circus under dear old Peter Gilliam. Enough already.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,690
    SeanT said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    Whatever. Thousands of girls in the UK are genitally mutilated every year - literally flown out to be clitorally mutilated, during the "cutting season" - and we have zero - ZERO - prosecutions. And the police do nothing. Not a single conviction.

    Then a few white rich middle age boors behave like average boors - OMG, hands up skirts! - and its front page on the FT??

    Spare me. Feminism is diseased. Like Socialism.
    Only white people can be sexist, you see.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,289

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Throwing your toys out the pram. Oh dear. I feel sorry for you.
    We await your asseverations as to FGM in the UK, and the total, shameful, grotesque non-prosecution thereof.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 10,511
    edited January 23
    Very interesting position May and Hammond have found themselves in today - Basically coming down AGAINST giving the NHS the Brexit dividend that was promised by Leave.

    And people wonder why these idiots blew the 2017 general election...
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,690
    Nigelb said:

    Can't help feeling there's a Bolton Defiant pun going missing somewhere...

    ... nickname Daffy:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant

    It was most successful when the Germans mistook it for the Hurricane. But when they learnt from their mistake, the Defiant was shot down in droves.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,010
    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    It sounds pretty seedy, like visiting strip clubs, massage parlours, lap dancing bars etc. It's not something I'd do, because it would be disrespectful to my wife. But, nor do I find it particularly disturbing.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 6,404
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Throwing your toys out the pram. Oh dear. I feel sorry for you.
    We await your asseverations as to FGM in the UK, and the total, shameful, grotesque non-prosecution thereof.
    We await? Did you not read my previous post (or indeed, the post I was replying to in the first place?) I didn’t mention FGM. I replied to a post that didn’t mention anything at all about it, but commented on sexual harassment at a charity event. That is pretty clear.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 16,116
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Y0kel said:

    Trumpton

    Memos to Boris Johnson.

    In a remarkable attempt to bolster the claim, quoted by one or two of Trump's team, that the Obama administration asked the UK Intelligence to spy on Donald Trump and the Trump Organisation, a letter has been released into the wilds of social media.

    This note, apparently addressed to Boris Johnson by an official in GCHQ talks about the request to spy on Donald and requests an approval for this effort to be continued for 90 days.

    Unfortunately it insists on mentioning some guy called Michael Steele, we assume they cant get Chris Steele's name right, he of the infamous dossier. Nor is his job title correct (which is a huge error), nor the organisation he worked for. Most of all, GCHQ routinely monitor key target comms out of the US, they don't write to the Foreign Secretary to get approval. Trump had come to the attention of Western intelligence including UK bodies years ago.

    In short, it looks fake. Question is, who is producing this stuff and why? There is an obsession amongst Trump supporters about Steele's work but whilst large slices of its output are credible (some of it is anecdote not fact) , its nothing that Western intelligence didn't know.

    I seriously doubt anyone with a genuine inside track on this stuff, would be posting about it on here. Poor tradecraft, we'd have called it in my day at the Circus under dear old Peter Gilliam. Enough already.
    Peter Guilliam?

    Or Terry Gilliam?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,530
    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    Sounds more like Philogyny club to me. All a bit meh, and I would pay good money to get out of being there, but it looks to have been an open secret and can easy target. I very much hope that the end result is not the gosh feeling it has to decline the money, and that it turns out that a very senior ft bod turns out to be among the gropers.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,530

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Y0kel said:

    Trumpton

    Memos to Boris Johnson.

    In a remarkable attempt to bolster the claim, quoted by one or two of Trump's team, that the Obama administration asked the UK Intelligence to spy on Donald Trump and the Trump Organisation, a letter has been released into the wilds of social media.

    This note, apparently addressed to Boris Johnson by an official in GCHQ talks about the request to spy on Donald and requests an approval for this effort to be continued for 90 days.

    Unfortunately it insists on mentioning some guy called Michael Steele, we assume they cant get Chris Steele's name right, he of the infamous dossier. Nor is his job title correct (which is a huge error), nor the organisation he worked for. Most of all, GCHQ routinely monitor key target comms out of the US, they don't write to the Foreign Secretary to get approval. Trump had come to the attention of Western intelligence including UK bodies years ago.

    In short, it looks fake. Question is, who is producing this stuff and why? There is an obsession amongst Trump supporters about Steele's work but whilst large slices of its output are credible (some of it is anecdote not fact) , its nothing that Western intelligence didn't know.

    I seriously doubt anyone with a genuine inside track on this stuff, would be posting about it on here. Poor tradecraft, we'd have called it in my day at the Circus under dear old Peter Gilliam. Enough already.
    Peter Guilliam?

    Or Terry Gilliam?
    Guillam, sorry. It is misspelled all over the internet, not that' that's an excuse.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    @Foxy I wouldn’t bother attempting to debate this subject on here.

    Because you will lose the debate.
    Nope.
    lol. Go on then. Try. Justify ZERO convictions for FGM. Be my guest. Knock yourself out.
    LOL, yourself. How on earth could to think I was referring to FGM? I replied to Foxy’s post on the FT story about sexual harassment at a charity event.
    You're a hypocrite and a cretin. And a shameful embarrassment to your gender.
    Throwing your toys out the pram. Oh dear. I feel sorry for you.
    We await your asseverations as to FGM in the UK, and the total, shameful, grotesque non-prosecution thereof.
    Of the 9000 or so cases recorded in the UK in 2015-6, around 75% were identified in pregnancy, so in older women. Only 43 cases were recorded in women born in the UK. 43 too many, of course.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/21/england-fgm-cases-recorded-2015-2016

    Fortunately, while older white men froth about it on the internet, there are some organisations of liberal women actually doing something about it.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 16,995
    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    The puritans are coming with their offence and their triggered shock.

    Time for the old and the next generation to ignore this wave of ridiculous bores - like Mary Whitehouse reincarnated.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 16,116
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Y0kel said:

    Trumpton

    Memos to Boris Johnson.

    In a remarkable attempt to bolster the claim, quoted by one or two of Trump's team, that the Obama administration asked the UK Intelligence to spy on Donald Trump and the Trump Organisation, a letter has been released into the wilds of social media.

    This note, apparently addressed to Boris Johnson by an official in GCHQ talks about the request to spy on Donald and requests an approval for this effort to be continued for 90 days.

    Unfortunately it insists on mentioning some guy called Michael Steele, we assume they cant get Chris Steele's name right, he of the infamous dossier. Nor is his job title correct (which is a huge error), nor the organisation he worked for. Most of all, GCHQ routinely monitor key target comms out of the US, they don't write to the Foreign Secretary to get approval. Trump had come to the attention of Western intelligence including UK bodies years ago.

    In short, it looks fake. Question is, who is producing this stuff and why? There is an obsession amongst Trump supporters about Steele's work but whilst large slices of its output are credible (some of it is anecdote not fact) , its nothing that Western intelligence didn't know.

    I seriously doubt anyone with a genuine inside track on this stuff, would be posting about it on here. Poor tradecraft, we'd have called it in my day at the Circus under dear old Peter Gilliam. Enough already.
    Peter Guilliam?

    Or Terry Gilliam?
    Guillam, sorry. It is misspelled all over the internet, not that' that's an excuse.
    I was just amused at the idea of British Intelligence being under the control of Terry Gilliam.

    (Apropos of nothing, the Good Lady Wifi said the funniest half hour of her life was sat watching Terry Gilliam and Russell Brand riffing off each other, when she introduced them to each other for the first time over lunch....)
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 16,995
    Foxy said:

    there are some organisations of liberal women actually doing something about it.

    They seem to be counting cases. Woo - that’s it solved.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,872
    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    It sounds pretty seedy, like visiting strip clubs, massage parlours, lap dancing bars etc. It's not something I'd do, because it would be disrespectful to my wife. But, nor do I find it particularly disturbing.
    My opinion is similar. None of the above are illegal.
    My complaint is the cheapness of it all. £150 a night given the money spent? Students and the like employed to be sexually harassed?
    Lack of informed consent there.
    They could have got professionals very easily. Would have cost more though.
    Entitled men will (in many, or most, cases) behave like entitled men.
    So shell out for people who are used to dealing with it.
    And compensate commensurately.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 4,334

    Nigelb said:

    Can't help feeling there's a Bolton Defiant pun going missing somewhere...

    ... nickname Daffy:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant

    It was most successful when the Germans mistook it for the Hurricane. But when they learnt from their mistake, the Defiant was shot down in droves.
    Always wondered if that gun turret might have been a subconscious inspiration for the Star Wars R2...

  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Y0kel said:

    Trumpton

    Memos to Boris Johnson.

    In a remarkable attempt to bolster the claim, quoted by one or two of Trump's team, that the Obama administration asked the UK Intelligence to spy on Donald Trump and the Trump Organisation, a letter has been released into the wilds of social media.

    This note, apparently addressed to Boris Johnson by an official in GCHQ talks about the request to spy on Donald and requests an approval for this effort to be continued for 90 days.

    Unfortunately it insists on mentioning some guy called Michael Steele, we assume they cant get Chris Steele's name right, he of the infamous dossier. Nor is his job title correct (which is a huge error), nor the organisation he worked for. Most of all, GCHQ routinely monitor key target comms out of the US, they don't write to the Foreign Secretary to get approval. Trump had come to the attention of Western intelligence including UK bodies years ago.

    In short, it looks fake. Question is, who is producing this stuff and why? There is an obsession amongst Trump supporters about Steele's work but whilst large slices of its output are credible (some of it is anecdote not fact) , its nothing that Western intelligence didn't know.

    I seriously doubt anyone with a genuine inside track on this stuff, would be posting about it on here. Poor tradecraft, we'd have called it in my day at the Circus under dear old Peter Gilliam. Enough already.
    You think I listen to your 'enough already'?

    It doesn't work that way, it will never work that way.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 20,877
    stodge said:

    AndyJS said:

    Two new German polls put the Social Democrats on 17% and 18%.

    http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm

    Not quite the whole story, though. Another poll has SPD at 20%. The most recent poll shows CDU/CSU falling even further than their disastrous Bundestag election vote (down to 31.5% with INSA).

    The main "winners" so far are AfD up to 14% and Die Linke at 11%. The INSA poll has the extraordinary statistic of the combined CDU/CSU/SPD falling below 50% which is unprecedented. The next four parties all share 45% between them which is again remarkable.
    I think 17% is the lowest the SPD have been in any poll since 1950.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,908
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    I supose it all depends if having a "socially conservative" girlfriend counts as a plus or a minus with the UKIP members. Not clear cut!

    She seems more socially, err, nationalist to me.
    I think once one uses the word "seed", one moves beyond mere nationalism.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,530
    dixiedean said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    It sounds pretty seedy, like visiting strip clubs, massage parlours, lap dancing bars etc. It's not something I'd do, because it would be disrespectful to my wife. But, nor do I find it particularly disturbing.
    My opinion is similar. None of the above are illegal.
    My complaint is the cheapness of it all. £150 a night given the money spent? Students and the like employed to be sexually harassed?
    Lack of informed consent there.
    They could have got professionals very easily. Would have cost more though.
    Entitled men will (in many, or most, cases) behave like entitled men.
    So shell out for people who are used to dealing with it.
    And compensate commensurately.
    My understanding is that the women in the relevant sort of ”club” are on a low basic, plus commission for persuading the punters to buy expensive drinks, plus whatever deals they make on their own account for various services. Why do you think 150 plus cab fare is below the going rate?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 12,561
    SeanT said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    Whatever. Thousands of girls in the UK are genitally mutilated every year - literally flown out to be clitorally mutilated, during the "cutting season" - and we have zero - ZERO - prosecutions. And the police do nothing. Not a single conviction.

    Then a few white rich middle age boors behave like average boors - OMG, hands up skirts! - and its front page on the FT??

    Spare me. Feminism is diseased. Like Socialism.
    Ah but the middle aged bores are potentially putting their hands up the skirts of girls who could be our sisters or daughters while FGM happens to those in another culture so won't affect us even if it occurs in our country ...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,908
    SeanT said:

    Bit of journalistic gossip. Just been to a party full of hacks.

    A *certain* Guardian editor - in one specific genre - told me that what they run, or don't run, as a story, is now pretty much ruled by "how it will be received on social media". i.e. if they fear it will be shot down on Twitter, they don't run it. End of.

    Extraordinary.

    My understanding is that the freelance journos at HuffPost, Slate and Breitbart are basically paid by the 'Facebook share'.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 617

    Nigelb said:

    Can't help feeling there's a Bolton Defiant pun going missing somewhere...

    ... nickname Daffy:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulton_Paul_Defiant

    It was most successful when the Germans mistook it for the Hurricane. But when they learnt from their mistake, the Defiant was shot down in droves.
    They were quite successful as night fighters though weren’t they?

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,872
    edited January 23
    Ishmael_Z said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    It sounds pretty seedy, like visiting strip clubs, massage parlours, lap dancing bars etc. It's not something I'd do, because it would be disrespectful to my wife. But, nor do I find it particularly disturbing.
    My opinion is similar. None of the above are illegal.
    My complaint is the cheapness of it all. £150 a night given the money spent? Students and the like employed to be sexually harassed?
    Lack of informed consent there.
    They could have got professionals very easily. Would have cost more though.
    Entitled men will (in many, or most, cases) behave like entitled men.
    So shell out for people who are used to dealing with it.
    And compensate commensurately.
    My understanding is that the women in the relevant sort of ”club” are on a low basic, plus commission for persuading the punters to buy expensive drinks, plus whatever deals they make on their own account for various services. Why do you think 150 plus cab fare is below the going rate?
    Because "hostessing", as you describe above, is an entirely legal, freely chosen, legitimate profession. This was not that. Drinks were included in ticket price.
    The rates may not differ much, but AIUI, there was no oppotunity for "extras". There is no reasonable money to be made, Therefore this is not hostessing.
    As evidence, FT journalists were employed.
    Why not professional hostesses?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 4,530
    dixiedean said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    It sounds pretty seedy, like visiting strip clubs, massage parlours, lap dancing bars etc. It's not something I'd do, because it would be disrespectful to my wife. But, nor do I find it particularly disturbing.
    My opinion is similar. None of the above are illegal.
    My complaint is the cheapness of it all. £150 a night given the money spent? Students and the like employed to be sexually harassed?
    Lack of informed consent there.
    They could have got professionals very easily. Would have cost more though.
    Entitled men will (in many, or most, cases) behave like entitled men.
    So shell out for people who are used to dealing with it.
    And compensate commensurately.
    My understanding is that the women in the relevant sort of ”club” are on a low basic, plus commission for persuading the punters to buy expensive drinks, plus whatever deals they make on their own account for various services. Why do you think 150 plus cab fare is below the going rate?
    Because "hostessing", as you describe above, is an entirely legal, freely chosen, legitimate profession. This was not that. Drinks were included in ticket price.
    The rates may not differ much, but AIUI, there was no oppotunity for "extras". Therefore this is not hostessing.
    As evidence, FT journalists were employed.
    'Drinks were included in ticket price.' My God, is no subterfuge too low for these inhuman vermin? But if we can't define what job these women are doing how do we know what the going rate for it is?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    TGOHF said:

    Foxy said:

    there are some organisations of liberal women actually doing something about it.

    They seem to be counting cases. Woo - that’s it solved.
    There has been mandatory reporting for some years. It is mostly Midwives and gynaecologists who do report.

    Intervening during pregnancy to protect the next generation from this sort of practice strikes me as a reasonable place to start.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 791
    edited January 23
    Interesting little snippet from the Guardian here, there is hope for my PP account yet:

    https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2018/jan/23/bookmakers-urged-to-rethink-closing-punters-accounts?__twitter_impression=true
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,872
    edited January 24
    Ishmael_Z said:

    dixiedean said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    Hmmm. 5 page Non Disclore forms that the hostesses were neither allowed to read nor keep a copy, and the sober suits were there to keep the hostesses from lingering in the loos, or not being friendly to the boors.

    What goes on in Misogyny Club, stays in Misogyny Club.
    It sounds pretty seedy, like visiting strip clubs, massage parlours, lap dancing bars etc. It's not something I'd do, because it would be disrespectful to my wife. But, nor do I find it particularly disturbing.
    My opinion is similar. None of the above are illegal.
    My complaint is the cheapness of it all. £150 a night given the money spent? Students and the like employed to be sexually harassed?
    Lack of informed consent there.
    They could have got professionals very easily. Would have cost more though.
    Entitled men will (in many, or most, cases) behave like entitled men.
    So shell out for people who are used to dealing with it.
    And compensate commensurately.
    My understanding is that the women in the relevant sort of ”club” are on a low basic, plus commission for persuading the punters to buy expensive drinks, plus whatever deals they make on their own account for various services. Why do you think 150 plus cab fare is below the going rate?
    Because "hostessing", as you describe above, is an entirely legal, freely chosen, legitimate profession. This was not that. Drinks were included in ticket price.
    The rates may not differ much, but AIUI, there was no oppotunity for "extras". Therefore this is not hostessing.
    As evidence, FT journalists were employed.
    'Drinks were included in ticket price.' My God, is no subterfuge too low for these inhuman vermin? But if we can't define what job these women are doing how do we know what the going rate for it is?
    Not sure why you are arguing with me tbh. We broadly agree. My objection is they were underpaid for the role. No-one anywhere in this tale is "inhuman vermin".
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 4,334
    RIP Ursula Le Guin.
  • Nigelb said:

    RIP Ursula Le Guin.

    +1
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 10,200
    HYUFD said:
    The second item on the page show 'Britain hooked on prescription drugs' has far nastier implications, lthough the story on the web doesn't quite stand up to the headline.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,543

    Nigelb said:

    RIP Ursula Le Guin.

    +1
    +2. Her Earthsea trilogy was one of my childhood favourites.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 265
    I reckon that 11/4 is a good bet for Henry to remain (no pun).........with NF on his side and media giving him airtime (or is it rope) UKIP may find he is the best option at a difficult time...any idea where those odds can be located.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 16,117
    Morning all. Betfair have also just started a market on next UKIP leader, although if Mike’s bet on Henry surviving comes off it may be a while before we get a contest.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28051208/market?marketId=1.139219161
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 4,334
    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    RIP Ursula Le Guin.

    +1
    +2. Her Earthsea trilogy was one of my childhood favourites.
    Its epigraph seems fitting.

    Only in silence the word,
    only in dark the light,
    only in dying life:
    bright the hawk's flight
    on the empty sky
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 18,668
    TGOHF said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    The puritans are coming with their offence and their triggered shock.

    Time for the old and the next generation to ignore this wave of ridiculous bores - like Mary Whitehouse reincarnated.
    I think there is a generational thing

    I was at a party that Deutsche organised over 20 years ago that also bussed in hostesses. Most people of my age was hideously embarassed by the whole thing (some of the bond traders quite enjoyed it) but the older guys were much more enthusiastic.

    Even then the party ended up on the front page of the Sunday Times. It wasn’t acceptable then and it’s not acceptable now

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,014
    edited January 24
    dixiedean said:



    My opinion is similar. None of the above are illegal.
    My complaint is the cheapness of it all. £150 a night given the money spent? Students and the like employed to be sexually harassed?
    Lack of informed consent there.
    They could have got professionals very easily. Would have cost more though.
    Entitled men will (in many, or most, cases) behave like entitled men.
    So shell out for people who are used to dealing with it.
    And compensate commensurately.

    FWIW I think there is a class difference here. I went most weeks to the Dusk Till Dawn poker club in Nottingham for years. The waitresses are scantily-dressed (unlike the female croupiers). The players (a couple of hundred a night) are 90% male and mosly working-class (e.g. long-distance HGV drivers enjoying a break) plus some students and the occasional professional. There was some low-level banter ("Are you serving me first because of my sexual attraction?" "Yeah, I try not to but you're so gorge, darling") but I never saw anyone waitress touched or propositioned by anyone - there wasn't any need for a rule for it, the blokes just didn't. I think the FT is right to pick on a distinguished assembly behaving very differently in what after all is NOT, in fact, a strip club.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 8,497

    I find nothing at all impressive with his refusal to see that he has lost the confidence of his colleagues. Bloodymindedness is not impressive...Bolton is tarnishing what is left of the UKIP brand and his refusal to see that is deeply unimpressive.

    Worked for Corbyn. And let's face it he's had some pretty unpleasant girlfriends in the past who go around making openly racist remarks and hangs out with lots of dodgy people including mass murderers too. The difference between him and Bolton is rather less than the striking similarities.

    Indeed, the key difference I can see is that Bolton (so far as I know) hasn't yet been accused of taking money from a fascist dictatorship to spread propaganda on their behalf.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 13,295
    Nigelb said:

    RIP Ursula Le Guin.

    Sad news. I very much enjoyed her books when I was younger. Left Hand of Darkness - brilliant.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,272

    Nigelb said:

    RIP Ursula Le Guin.

    Sad news. I very much enjoyed her books when I was younger. Left Hand of Darkness - brilliant.
    Good morning all.

    Absolutely agree. Her Earthsea books were also excellent.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 18,467
    Charles said:

    TGOHF said:

    SeanT said:


    These girls get £150 a night to tolerate some drunk, middle aged, boring business class idiots being idiots, and their job is just to look nice and hand out bubbly. And they are also allowed to drink and have fun, at the same time. AND there are sober dudes overlooking it all and making sure no one is unduly stressed. £150. For about four hours work. No one is enslaving them.

    What is this censorious Britain we want to inhabit? We have entered a kind of madness.

    The puritans are coming with their offence and their triggered shock.

    Time for the old and the next generation to ignore this wave of ridiculous bores - like Mary Whitehouse reincarnated.
    I think there is a generational thing

    I was at a party that Deutsche organised over 20 years ago that also bussed in hostesses. Most people of my age was hideously embarassed by the whole thing (some of the bond traders quite enjoyed it) but the older guys were much more enthusiastic.

    Even then the party ended up on the front page of the Sunday Times. It wasn’t acceptable then and it’s not acceptable now

    Just as long as it wasn't like this rather infamous German one:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13454160

    "One of the biggest insurance companies in the world held a party for salesmen where they were rewarded with the services of prostitutes."
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,892
    HYUFD said:
    Every time I have been past the parliament at Holyrood, the Saltire, the Union flag and the EU flag have been flying.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 11,574
    edited January 24
    You couldn't make it up.

    Jonathan Ashsworth, labour's health secretary, has accused Boris of 'weaponising the NHS'

    It does make you think that labour are concerned that Boris demand for the EU savings to go into the NHS will be very popular

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 18,494

    Nigelb said:

    RIP Ursula Le Guin.

    Sad news. I very much enjoyed her books when I was younger. Left Hand of Darkness - brilliant.
    It was superb. One of the more thought provoking sci-Fi books not by Frank Herbert.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,872
    SeanT said:

    Bit of journalistic gossip. Just been to a party full of hacks.

    A *certain* Guardian editor - in one specific genre - told me that what they run, or don't run, as a story, is now pretty much ruled by "how it will be received on social media". i.e. if they fear it will be shot down on Twitter, they don't run it. End of.

    Extraordinary.

    Social media mob-rule today reminds me of the overbearing trade unions of the 1970s.

    A new Thatcher for the 21stC is required.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 4,334

    You couldn't make it up.

    Jonathan Ashsworth, labour's health secretary, has accused Boris of 'weaponising the NHS'

    It does make you think that labour are comcerned that Boris demand for the EU savings to go into the NHS will be very popular

    Whatever you think of Johnson (in my case, not a lot), that is perhaps the most ludicrous thing from a politician this week, even including the Channel bridge.

    Believing one has a monopoly on virtue is not an attractive attribute.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 22,872
    Looks like Sturgeon feels obliged to throw her base some red meat to me.
This discussion has been closed.