General News

[Grebfromgrebland]

21 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

JSO can’t be arsed to actually do the hard work of lobbying power and convincing the public, so instead they are doing stupid stunts which have the opposite effect.  ****wits.

They've done all that for 40 years. It doesn't work and never will.

 

Truth is though, nothing will stop big oil and corporations doing what ever they want. They have the might of the UK and US military behind them.

 

We'll stop at nothing to get more oil and gas and minerals. We've literally killed millions of people over the last few years to obtain cheap oil and we'll carry on doing so. What anyone thinks in the UK whether JSO or Greenpeace or lord ****ing drax won't change a thing.

 

There is no cause or movement really. Just publicity.

[Jon the Hat]

7 hours ago, Tommy G said:

This is exactly it, in a nutshell. I know people will have roses stapled to their eyeballs but there a lots of people unhappy about this, from a moral standpoint. 

 

Starmer has received more donations than every single Labour leader since 1997 combined by the way. The £20,000 GCSE excuse when the period in question didn’t even cover the majority of the GCSE period. Was he also breaking Covid rules by staying there? That will be revealed this week. 
 

Post election for any government should be the honeymoon period, this has been anything but. 
 

People will peddle how bad it was under the tories - and yes it was, terrible -  especially with Boris and Truss. Why would anyone use that as a yardstick for what the future should look like? We used to be in league one so we should be grateful we’re playing so badly in the premier league? Same principle. 
 

Toad in the hole almost ready, couldn’t resist a trip to the butchers this week. 

Covid rules?  In 2024?  The $20k point is nonsense, he stayed in a friends apartment to avoid the press during the GE.  No one handed over $20k that is a theoretical rent if the apartment had been rented for a short period, which it wasn't.  The rest of it though is not a good look imo, Starmer is not a poor man, and he should be able to buy himself some clothes ffs.  

Edited 30 September 2024 by Jon the Hat

[Jon the Hat]

3 hours ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

They've done all that for 40 years. It doesn't work and never will.

 

Truth is though, nothing will stop big oil and corporations doing what ever they want. They have the might of the UK and US military behind them.

 

We'll stop at nothing to get more oil and gas and minerals. We've literally killed millions of people over the last few years to obtain cheap oil and we'll carry on doing so. What anyone thinks in the UK whether JSO or Greenpeace or lord ****ing drax won't change a thing.

 

There is no cause or movement really. Just publicity.

Excellent, so all the improvements in Environmental standards, pollution, emissions etc. have sod all to do with environmental groups pressure?  Good to know!

[Tommy G]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Covid rules?  In 2024?  The $20k point is nonsense, he stayed in a friends apartment to avoid the press during the GE.  No one handed over $20k that is a theoretical rent if the apartment had been rented for a short period, which it wasn't.  The rest of it though is not a good look imo, Starmer is not a poor man, and he should be able to buy himself some clothes ffs.  

He used the apartment in 2021 during Covid when we were all encouraged to WFH. I recognise there are no restrictions in 2024! 
 

 

 

[Trav Le Bleu]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Covid rules?  In 2024?  The $20k point is nonsense, he stayed in a friends apartment to avoid the press during the GE.  No one handed over $20k that is a theoretical rent if the apartment had been rented for a short period, which it wasn't.  The rest of it though is not a good look imo, Starmer is not a poor man, and he should be able to buy himself some clothes ffs.  

One of the most bizarre things I find in life is how the very well off are frequently given stuff for free.

[leicsmac]

46 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

One of the most bizarre things I find in life is how the very well off are frequently given stuff for free.

Money has its own gravity, I've found. In terms of more money and material items.

[MPH]

So it’s becoming more and more apparent that the current Israeli leadership care little about anyone but themselves. Yes, I know they have had to fight for survival, trying to secure the future of their country… I get all that…

 

But they appear to me to be the first ‘western civilization’  who have the mentality to use a nuclear weapon. It’s clear to them that the problem is Iran.  And I hope Iran personally don’t get directly involved in the conflict…   And I know Iran themselves have gone on record as saying they are committed to the total annihilation of Israel.

 

I just  have a very uneasy feeling about any direct war between Iran and Israel…
 

 

[Zear0]

9 minutes ago, MPH said:

So it’s becoming more and more apparent that the current Israeli leadership care little about anyone but themselves. Yes, I know they have had to fight for survival, trying to secure the future of their country… I get all that…

 

But they appear to me to be the first ‘western civilization’  who have the mentality to use a nuclear weapon. It’s clear to them that the problem is Iran.  And I hope Iran personally don’t get directly involved in the conflict…   And I know Iran themselves have gone on record as saying they are committed to the total annihilation of Israel.

 

I just  have a very uneasy feeling about any direct war between Iran and Israel…
 

 

The US have already used nuclear weapons, twice, so they'd be the second "western" nation to do so.  I don't actually thing it's a credible risk tbh.  Similar to Russian in Ukraine, the leadership have judged any military benefit is outweighed by the detriments of becoming an international pariah.  Israel can only do what's doing with the backing of the US, and to a lesser extent, Europe.

 

I believe that Israel are doing what they're doing as they've previously over estimated the capability of Iran and it's Axis of Resistance to respond with any meaningful conventional attack on Israel.  This confidence from their enemies being far less capable than they'd assumed, for me anyway, reduces the likelihood of Israel using nuclear weapons.  Why would they, what's the benefit?  They can destroy any Iranian facility with conventional weapons whenever they want, and if they use nuclear weapons, there's a strong chance the US would abandon them which would make them even more vulnerable without their key ally.

 

Not sure which BBC journalist it was who wrote an opinion piece was saying things that Iran can't undertake a significant attack on Israel without the fear of the US just wiping them out.  Comes back to the earlier point that Iran, even if they could, are unlikely to attack Israel in such a way that would elicit a nuclear response.

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

The US have already used nuclear weapons, twice, so they'd be the second "western" nation to do so.  I don't actually thing it's a credible risk tbh.  Similar to Russian in Ukraine, the leadership have judged any military benefit is outweighed by the detriments of becoming an international pariah.  Israel can only do what's doing with the backing of the US, and to a lesser extent, Europe.

 

I believe that Israel are doing what they're doing as they've previously over estimated the capability of Iran and it's Axis of Resistance to respond with any meaningful conventional attack on Israel.  This confidence from their enemies being far less capable than they'd assumed, for me anyway, reduces the likelihood of Israel using nuclear weapons.  Why would they, what's the benefit?  They can destroy any Iranian facility with conventional weapons whenever they want, and if they use nuclear weapons, there's a strong chance the US would abandon them which would make them even more vulnerable without their key ally.

 

Not sure which BBC journalist it was who wrote an opinion piece was saying things that Iran can't undertake a significant attack on Israel without the fear of the US just wiping them out.  Comes back to the earlier point that Iran, even if they could, are unlikely to attack Israel in such a way that would elicit a nuclear response.

 

hezbollah have many tens of thousands of missiles available to launch. If they went for it (would have to be with Iran’s approval) then they would easily overwhelm Israel’s air defences.  The response would not be something Iran is likely to risk. 

I agree with you that they wouldn’t use nuclear weapons though - it’s their ultimate deterrent given their geographical position surrounded by states and are at best indifferent at govt level.  Clearly they don’t want Iran developing nuclear capability but again, I can’t see that Iran would launch anything into Israel given that Gaza and the West Bank would surely be subject to fall out.  I guess on a military level, having the capability raises your profile. Israel currently knows it could strike anywhere in Iran with conventional weapons and that Iran could only do the same if it went with a very large number of launches which by their nature would likely risk Palestinian casualties in both the West Bank and Gaza due to some malfunctions. 
 

something i noticed looking through the news today regarding UNWRA and Hamas 

 

From the Palestine chronicle blog

In southern Lebanon, the head of the UNRWA Teachers Union in Lebanon, Fateh al-Sharif, was killed along with his family in an Israeli raid on the al-Bass camp.

from the BBC 

Hamas says Lebanese leader killed in air strikepublished at 07:20 British Summer Time

07:20 BST

Palestinian militant group Hamas says Fateh Sherif Abu el-Amin, the group's leader in Lebanon, has been killed along with some family members in an Israeli air strike in southern Lebanon.

[LiberalFox]

I'm not sure Hezbollah could overwhelm Israeli air defences. Even if they have enough rockets and missiles they would need enough people trained in launching them, enough launch sites and to be able to coordinate it. 

 

Considering their leadership just got wiped out, their communications network got destroyed along with thousands of militants and Israel has total air supremacy over Lebanon I don't see that happening. 

 

I'm thinking Israel keeps the air war going and lets their air defence take care of sporadic launches. 

 

What I'm reading now is that Iran faces a dilemma because if they negotiate now then they have accepted a strategic defeat but they don't really have many options left because trying to launch an all out war with Israel and the US would result in a defeat. On the other hand this might be a chance to end the conflict without fully achieving Israel's objectives in Gaza. So it might suit Iran to take the defeat but have some influence left still. 

 

[MPH]

42 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

I'm not sure Hezbollah could overwhelm Israeli air defences. Even if they have enough rockets and missiles they would need enough people trained in launching them, enough launch sites and to be able to coordinate it. 

 

Considering their leadership just got wiped out, their communications network got destroyed along with thousands of militants and Israel has total air supremacy over Lebanon I don't see that happening. 

 

I'm thinking Israel keeps the air war going and lets their air defence take care of sporadic launches. 

 

What I'm reading now is that Iran faces a dilemma because if they negotiate now then they have accepted a strategic defeat but they don't really have many options left because trying to launch an all out war with Israel and the US would result in a defeat. On the other hand this might be a chance to end the conflict without fully achieving Israel's objectives in Gaza. So it might suit Iran to take the defeat but have some influence left still. 

 

 

good post.

 

 

i will say however that any part of the negotiations for Israel MUST include the returning of all hostages. They will insist on that, and that in of itself for Hamas will register as a defeat. I mean, it’s not like they haven’t already been defeated, but  to my knowledge, one of the reasons we have only seen sporadic use of bunker buster bombs in Gaza is because the Israelis don’t know where all the hostages are. It will be the absolute end of all Hamas underground infrastructure if the hostages are released as there will be absolutely nothing to stop them..

[LiberalFox]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

good post.

 

 

i will say however that any part of the negotiations for Israel MUST include the returning of all hostages. They will insist on that, and that in of itself for Hamas will register as a defeat. I mean, it’s not like they haven’t already been defeated, but  to my knowledge, one of the reasons we have only seen sporadic use of bunker buster bombs in Gaza is because the Israelis don’t know where all the hostages are. It will be the absolute end of all Hamas underground infrastructure if the hostages are released as there will be absolutely nothing to stop them..

Yeah the hostages are probably keeping Sinwar alive (if he's alive) I'm sure Hamas would consider existing and an Israeli withdrawal from the strip as a victory. They could certainly claim it as such. Sinwar being alive seems like a problem. I could see Israel letting some Hamas survive but not removing the mastermind of the 7/10 attack would be a difficult sell. 

 

Obviously the hostages must all be returned as part of any proper ceasefire. 

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

Yeah the hostages are probably keeping Sinwar alive (if he's alive) I'm sure Hamas would consider existing and an Israeli withdrawal from the strip as a victory. They could certainly claim it as such. Sinwar being alive seems like a problem. I could see Israel letting some Hamas survive but not removing the mastermind of the 7/10 attack would be a difficult sell. 

 

Obviously the hostages must all be returned as part of any proper ceasefire. 

Word from Washington was that Israel offered (three weeks ago) sinwar and his family safe passage as part of a ceasefire agreement which released all the hostages immediately.  I do wonder if that indicates israel thinks sinwar may be dead or used it as a way to try and flush out whether he’s still alive. 

[MPH]

3 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

Yeah the hostages are probably keeping Sinwar alive (if he's alive) I'm sure Hamas would consider existing and an Israeli withdrawal from the strip as a victory. They could certainly claim it as such. Sinwar being alive seems like a problem. I could see Israel letting some Hamas survive but not removing the mastermind of the 7/10 attack would be a difficult sell. 

 

Obviously the hostages must all be returned as part of any proper ceasefire. 

 

I have a lot more sympathy for the Palestinians  than some do.. People will show you pictures of many dancing in the streets  because of November 7th and yes, Hamas does have its supporters. But what many don’t realize and what Israel seem to ignore is that Hamas rule by fear and brutality and by torturing their own people. Similar to North Korea, I’d you are NOT seen celebrating the regime, you are an enemy. There’s definitely lots of people who do support them but there’s also many out there ‘ celebrating’ out of fear. I would strongly reccomend everyone reading a book called ‘Son of Hamas’ . It was written by the son of one of the founding leaders of Hamas  and he describes the brutality against their own people clearly. Not only did he turn against Hamas, he left the Muslim faith because of it all..

[Zear0]

Put the chances for those hostages ever making it out as 0 tbh.  Probably long dead and Hamas keep quiet as it's their only bargaining chip.

[MPH]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Word from Washington was that Israel offered (three weeks ago) sinwar and his family safe passage as part of a ceasefire agreement which released all the hostages immediately.  I do wonder if that indicates israel thinks sinwar may be dead or used it as a way to try and flush out whether he’s still alive. 

 

He’ll only become a Mossad target  further down the line if he gets out..

[st albans fox]

9 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

He’ll only become a Mossad target  further down the line if he gets out..

I guess so although if a govt does agree safe passage then I think that if he doesn’t break his part of the agreement in the future then he should be safe. The thought of him ‘retiring’ from the struggle even in exile would be a stretch though. that would remove his ‘safety’.
 

Reports yesterday that there are still negs ongoing but they (Egypt and Qatar) are no longer attempting to consult sinwar because he’s not been heard from for a couple of weeks.  As was mooted last October, without the hostages, the tunnel network below Gaza is going to be destroyed, either by flooding or by bunker busters.  Hamas release the hostages and they effectively surrender.  I think that’s one of the main reasons that biden’s three stage plan never got anywhere. Neither side had any expectation that it would get past stage 1. 
 

@mph - broadly agree with your sentiment about a proportion of those in Gaza having no alternative but to toe the party line to stay safe.  There was, hover, no requirement to be seen singing and dancing in the streets last October. you could have stayed home ??  being carried along without knowing the details of what had actually been done is an excuse of sorts.   We need to somehow move forward two generations in an instant across a swathe of the region. 

[urban.spaceman]

 

Tories:

Bring in the OBR

Refuse to listen to it when it tells you you're about to crash the economy

Blame it for crashing the economy

Lie to it about the £22bn black hole you're leaving to the next government

Then claim OBR is the problem

[CosbehFox]

7 hours ago, Tommy G said:

He used the apartment in 2021 during Covid when we were all encouraged to WFH. I recognise there are no restrictions in 2024! 
 

 

 

He didn't break a rule in 2021. It was the week in the lead-up to the rules coming in place. People were still going Cheltenham and sitting in pubs. Can argue if it was appropriate for him to use it. 

[Tommy G]

6 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

Tories:

Bring in the OBR

Refuse to listen to it when it tells you you're about to crash the economy

Blame it for crashing the economy

Lie to it about the £22bn black hole you're leaving to the next government

Then claim OBR is the problem

Don't give that lunatic any air time

[CosbehFox]

On 28/09/2024 at 20:24, Otis said:

She's not wrong.

 

In the letter published by the Sunday Times she said: 'Since the change of government in July, the revelations of hypocrisy have been staggering and increasingly outrageous.

'I cannot put into words how angry I and my colleagues are at your total lack of understanding about how you have made us all appear.'

She added: 'The sleaze, nepotism and apparent avarice are off the scale. I am so ashamed of what you and your inner circle have done to tarnish and humiliate our once proud party.'

She's more than fair to state her opinion but they aren't revelations. This information is going out because they are being correctly recoded. 

[Greg2607]

5 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Don't give that lunatic any air time

she's a great example of what happens when people from think tanks get into power. 

 

[Lionator]

3 hours ago, MPH said:

So it’s becoming more and more apparent that the current Israeli leadership care little about anyone but themselves. Yes, I know they have had to fight for survival, trying to secure the future of their country… I get all that…

 

But they appear to me to be the first ‘western civilization’  who have the mentality to use a nuclear weapon. It’s clear to them that the problem is Iran.  And I hope Iran personally don’t get directly involved in the conflict…   And I know Iran themselves have gone on record as saying they are committed to the total annihilation of Israel.

 

I just  have a very uneasy feeling about any direct war between Iran and Israel…
 

 

Bill Burns would have Netanyahu shot on the spot if they genuinely thought he was gearing up to use a nuclear weapon. It would mean that Putin would use them in Ukraine as the ‘taboo’ that he doesn’t want to break would be broken and it would destroy all US credibility and would lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons all across the Middle East and beyond. It would be far easier to put a bullet in Netanyahu’s head.

 

[Tommy G]

7 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

She's more than fair to state her opinion but they aren't revelations. This information is going out because they are being correctly recoded. 

Recorded I think you mean. Nothing illegal about these donations and anyone who is switched on upstairs realises that. I think the issue the general public take umbrage (reflected in popularity ratings too) is £32,000 of clothes for a very wealthy guy who is telling us there's lots of difficult decisions to make, and we must build back together, and no you can't have you winter fuel allowance etc etc. 

 

The multi millionaire who respresents the working class man on the streets - whose entire campaign conflicts with the above. 

[CosbehFox]

8 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Recorded I think you mean. Nothing illegal about these donations and anyone who is switched on upstairs realises that. I think the issue the general public take umbrage (reflected in popularity ratings too) is £32,000 of clothes for a very wealthy guy who is telling us there's lots of difficult decisions to make, and we must build back together, and no you can't have you winter fuel allowance etc etc. 

 

The multi millionaire who respresents the working class man on the streets - whose entire campaign conflicts with the above. 

I see your point entirely but it's a completely different point to what I am making. 

 

I challenged Duffield's use of 'revelations'. A revelation is a surprising or unknown fact. The Starmer story literally stems from the Financial Times taking a look at the declarations (and £5k to his wife, reported by the Tory party to the commission). 

Edited 30 September 2024 by CosbehFox