FlyTheNest

Fucking 'ell training in anti-semitism?

Cabinet is united on Brexit trade strategy, insists Amber Rudd

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... toms-union" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

cabinet-united-brexit-trade-strategy-amber-rudd-theresa-may-customs-union

HindleA wrote:Fucking 'ell training in anti-semitism?

You know what I mean

I just read the headline.

@HindleA

Was that it - your Captain Oates moment?

refitman wrote:

tinyclanger2 wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/for ... 90686.html
Goodbye grid girls – there is no place in sport for sexual objectification anymore

I am genuinely puzzled by the gender equality movement. If I understand correctly, only certain types of women are allowed now? Not those who want to be, say, cheerleaders? And where are Madonna and Miley Cyrus on this spectrum. Aren't they objectifying women?

I do recall the discussion around the first female Dr Who about how she wasn't going to be tramping around a field wearing stilletoes and getting someone to help her with her sonic screwdriver - but why not? Some women do wear stilletoes and some aren't into DIY. Is that not allowed now?

This may be read completely wrong, so I apologise in advance for putting over the wrong impression.

My view is that grid-girls and darts valets and the like are just there to provide something to look at. They could be replaced by a sign on a pole and all you would lose is the T&A.

Cheerleaders/Madonna/Miley are actually doing something that requires skill (is that the right word) and they do something that can be separated from how they look.

Yep, you've explained it well

Good-afternoon, everyone

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/thousand ... ar_twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thousands facing real hardship and even repossession as vital benefit replaced with loan
Worse, many people haven't even been told their benefits are being changed yet


NB not necessarilly all interest,average about £30 a week.Also removes the ability to work(despite the misrepresentation you could also,I did for five years,disregard,continued pension contribution,employment,contact etc)Obviously,I view as particularly pernicious if you cannot move-we couldn't,in breach of DFG agreement and far more the message,continued residualisation of the contributory factor,needless binaryfication and false portrayal as takers in our case to me.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:According to the article I read at the Express (yeuch), Mike Sivier has NOT been readmitted to Labour because he declined to accept the requirement that he would undertake training on anti-semitism.

Not according to sivier himself who says he has been restored to full membership (you'll have to read through lots of his drivel to get to that)

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/02/ ... -so-i-did/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:According to the article I read at the Express (yeuch), Mike Sivier has NOT been readmitted to Labour because he declined to accept the requirement that he would undertake training on anti-semitism.

Not according to sivier himself who says he has been restored to full membership (you'll have to read through lots of his drivel to get to that)

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/02/ ... -so-i-did/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He agrees that de facto it is the case, because he will not attend the "training" so will be re-expelled.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:According to the article I read at the Express (yeuch), Mike Sivier has NOT been readmitted to Labour because he declined to accept the requirement that he would undertake training on anti-semitism.

Not according to sivier himself who says he has been restored to full membership (you'll have to read through lots of his drivel to get to that)

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/02/ ... -so-i-did/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He agrees that de facto it is the case, because he will not attend the "training" so will be re-expelled.

We'll see whether he is suspended again. I doubt it. Those in charge are no longer the same.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


China accuses US of 'Cold War mentality' over nuclear policy

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... utsourcing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


After Carillion and Capita, is PFI itself on the critical list?

tinyclanger2 wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/for ... 90686.html
Goodbye grid girls – there is no place in sport for sexual objectification anymore

I am genuinely puzzled by the gender equality movement. If I understand correctly, only certain types of women are allowed now? Not those who want to be, say, cheerleaders? And where are Madonna and Miley Cyrus on this spectrum. Aren't they objectifying women?

I do recall the discussion around the first female Dr Who about how she wasn't going to be tramping around a field wearing stilletoes and getting someone to help her with her sonic screwdriver - but why not? Some women do wear stilletoes and some aren't into DIY. Is that not allowed now?

(cJA bold)

She doesn't want to, I'd imagine. That's why she said it. The first female Dr Who doesn't speak for all women when she talks about what she does and doesn't want to do. That doesn't mean all women are no longer allowed to wear stilletoes and maintain a disinclination for do it yourself activities. I read the article you've linked and didn't find where it said only certain types of women are allowed now. Where'd you see that? Are you asking these questions in all seriousness?

Are some representations being proscribed,"choice" removed in effect,I would imagine.

House of Lords Library
Fake News

Fake news is not a new term. In the 20th Century, its popularity in the printed media rose from the end of the First World War to a peak in 1940—coinciding with the onset of the Second World War. Academic Kalev Leetaru, writing in Forbes magazine, suggested that this reflected “the rise of propaganda research and the impact that false information could have on societies” at that time.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk ... -2017-0040

I like the Parliamentary website and the different research reports published. It's a good resource.
Most topics are more interesting than the I've linked above. This one landed in my e-mail inbox recently though it's dated April last year.

HindleA wrote:Are some representations being proscribed,"choice" removed in effect,I would imagine.

How is choice being limited? Anyone can show up in high heels and a bikini at those events. Have at it.

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... utsourcing


After Carillion and Capita, is PFI itself on the critical list?

I hope so.

I never said it was.It was a suggested question.Are some women intimidated/wary/feel restricted by the attitude of others.I attended a womens course summer school with the OU,if I spoke I was dominating,if I didn't I wasn't contributing and might as well not be there.The keeping a door open,as I would do regardless of sex was "sexist" to some.

citizenJA wrote:

HindleA wrote:Are some representations being proscribed,"choice" removed in effect,I would imagine.

How is choice being limited? Anyone can show up in high heels and a bikini at those events. Have at it.

With or without dressing gown?

Booking a chest wax before my bikini/high heel appearance.

I blame tc2 for changing the subject.

HindleA wrote:I never said it was.It was a suggested question.Are some women intimidated/wary/feel restricted by the attitude of others.I attended a womens course summer school with the OU,if I spoke I was dominating,if I didn't I wasn't contributing and might as well not be there.The keeping a door open,as I would do regardless of sex was "sexist" to some.

I know and love you. It's likely you didn't dominate the conversation or slouch petulantly, sighing loudly when you didn't speak. Was there a proctor, an instructor guiding the course? Specific people questioning your attendance and participation in the class needed enlightening. The course was better with you there. I'm sorry I missed it.

HindleA wrote:I blame tc2 for changing the subject.

tinyclanger2 is brilliant

PorFavor wrote:

citizenJA wrote:

HindleA wrote:Are some representations being proscribed,"choice" removed in effect,I would imagine.

How is choice being limited? Anyone can show up in high heels and a bikini at those events. Have at it.

With or without dressing gown?

Depends on the weather.
Hey, when's our next dress up convention? We always have so much fun playing runway.

To be fair,only the more strident guilty by being maleists-not judging, may well be reasons as regards their obvious disdain.Certainly didn't dominate by any objective measure,my mere prescence was "enough" to so proclaim.

HindleA wrote:---
The keeping a door open,as I would do regardless of sex was "sexist" to some.

(cJA edit)

Some people aren't very nice, finding a problem where none exist. Hopefully, they've grown, healed or found peace inside themselves; no longer finding fault with an honourable, gentle and bloody-minded human being holding open the door.

The show us yer tits tee-shirt might not have helped.



Remember to laugh.

HindleA wrote:To be fair,only the more strident guilty by being maleists-not judging, may well be reasons as regards their obvious disdain.Certainly didn't dominate by any objective measure,my mere prescence was "enough" to so proclaim.

It wasn't your fault, regardless. People get hurt and in turn hurt others. It's wrong, hurting others is wrong. We must keep watch over each other, stop pain from starting, help others heal and call for back up when tinyclanger2 shows up in the Oscar de la Renta disco suit with matching platforms.

HindleA wrote:The show us yer tits tee-shirt might not have helped.



Remember to laugh.

You're one of my best friends in the world!

PF link above

So much for the cast-iron promises of developers, lauded by Ms Kober !

And the absolute scale of the luxury building really did amaze me too —

“”The council has allowed the developer of the Battersea power station site to build just 386 affordable homes in the 4,239-home redevelopment. Only 9% of the homes will be affordable, far below London mayor Sadiq Khan’s 35% affordability target for all new large developments.

Khan said he was “furious” that Wandsworth council had allowed the Malaysian-backed Battersea Power Station Development Company to cut down its original promise of 636 affordable homes in the £9bn transformation of the London landmark. The developer had complained that falling sales of luxury homes would knock its profit margin on the redevelopment, which will also include a new UK headquarters for Apple.“”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ers-london" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

After the recent decline in Sterling many of the richer speculators took losses of several £100,000’s !

I can't find the link but previously given as to manner/ways in which obligations/targets/agreements are usurped as to companies "calculations"

frog222 wrote:PF link above

So much for the cast-iron promises of developers, lauded by Ms Kober !

And the absolute scale of the luxury building really did amaze me too —

“”The council has allowed the developer of the Battersea power station site to build just 386 affordable homes in the 4,239-home redevelopment. Only 9% of the homes will be affordable, far below London mayor Sadiq Khan’s 35% affordability target for all new large developments.

Khan said he was “furious” that Wandsworth council had allowed the Malaysian-backed Battersea Power Station Development Company to cut down its original promise of 636 affordable homes in the £9bn transformation of the London landmark. The developer had complained that falling sales of luxury homes would knock its profit margin on the redevelopment, which will also include a new UK headquarters for Apple.“”


https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ers-london" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

After the recent decline in Sterling many of the richer speculators took losses of several £100,000’s !

Yes - I was reading about that the other day. I set up a fund-raiser for them, but I haven't managed to attract any support. I thought that you, at least, would have chipped in . . .

citizenJA wrote:

HindleA wrote:The show us yer tits tee-shirt might not have helped.



Remember to laugh.

You're one of my best friends in the world!

[youtube]HaZpZQG2z10[/youtube]

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Shortfall in teacher numbers hits 30,000
New figures expose recruitment crisis in secondary and further education – and in subjects government declared a priority

skwalkbox on "white shirt"

https://skwawkbox.org/2018/02/04/white- ... al-artist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

white-shirt-identified-rees-mogg-supporting-martial-artist

Another good Brexit article from a Matthew

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... may-tories" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Matthew D'Ancona

She is the stuffed remnant of a once-optimistic prime minister, helpless in the midst of anarchic cacophony. This is government by taxidermy.

I am scarcely Jeremy Corbyn’s greatest fan, but the notion that the status quo must be preserved simply to thwart his chances of becoming prime minister is not only democratically contemptible but morally outrageous.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:skwalkbox on "white shirt"

https://skwawkbox.org/2018/02/04/white- ... al-artist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

white-shirt-identified-rees-mogg-supporting-martial-artist

I was thinking, this morning, that the only violence was instigated by the Jacob Rees Mogg supporter. At least Sarah Smith (BBC Sunday Politics) went some way to point out that there was no evidence to connect Labour with the scuffle (or are we now meant to say "altercation"?).

https://labour.org.uk/press/andrew-gwyn ... y-council/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Andrew Gwynne MP backs local calls for commissioners to be called into bankrupt Northamptonshire County Council

Londoners without money, burnt out of their homes or tossed out of where they used to live get shipped out of their city of residence to other places in the UK while empty housing in London remains.

"Ye have been the Blackguard Enemies of the People on all occasions, Ye have not yet done as ye ought,...."

And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

SpinningHugo wrote:And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

They're not fucking Labour for a start. Condemn them all you want, but don't cast aspersions.

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

They're not fucking Labour for a start. Condemn them all you want, but don't cast aspersions.

Also, there's a big difference between shouting and punching people in the face.

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

They're not fucking Labour for a start. Condemn them all you want, but don't cast aspersions.

I'm not at all sure what you mean? Who, even among the right wing nutjob press, has said they're representatives of the Labour party? I certainly haven't. A bizarre claim.

refitman wrote:

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

They're not fucking Labour for a start. Condemn them all you want, but don't cast aspersions.

Also, there's a big difference between shouting and punching people in the face.

There is indeed.

How do you think the punching excuses the shouting down?

SH appearing to be struggling with the very basic concept of appropriate behaviour.

It could be argued that, since Jacob Rees Mogg has abused his position as an MP (and the protections thus afforded by the House of Commons) to lie and defame others for his own ends, with apparent impunity, he's fair game. In fact, he's set the rules of the game.

"SpinningHugo"]

refitman wrote:

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

They're not fucking Labour for a start. Condemn them all you want, but don't cast aspersions.

Also, there's a big difference between shouting and punching people in the face.

There is indeed.

How do you think the punching excuses the shouting down?

Psst there's a difference between AntiFa and Labour/Momentum . But maybe that's a bit too complicated for you.

Still waiting for SH's answer to the question he set himself.

SpinningHugo wrote:

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:And we think this excuses the protesters in face masks and sunglasses shouting down Rees-Mogg because?

They're not fucking Labour for a start. Condemn them all you want, but don't cast aspersions.

I'm not at all sure what you mean? Who, even among the right wing nutjob press, has said they're representatives of the Labour party? I certainly haven't. A bizarre claim.

Brandon Lewis (who admittedly is only a member of the "right wing nutjob" government - and not the "right wing nutjob" press).