Thursday 16th January 2025
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025

From CaroleCadwaladr, links to follow --
" Donie, who posted this, is an Irish CNN reporter who stood amid the insurrectionists on January 6, 2020, and said conspiracies on Facebook had done this. He’d spent months interviewing Trump supporters at rallies about the conspiracies they’d been reading on Facebook. And, through it all, he reported straight without judgment. I watched him that night, live on CNN, and saw him break cover and make that statement and that he had no choice: this was an insurrection that Facebook facilitated.
We need to start understanding that Elon Musk’s X is a weapon. It’s a weapon that is currently owned and controlled by a non-state entity. But from January 20, that changes. At that point, Musk’s behaviour must be understood in the context of information warfare from a hostile nation state.
That’s a week away and the UK parliament and half the press has been obsessively talking about the fire that Musk started rather than what that tells us about the colossal firepower he controls and the profound national security threat that poses."
Last edited by Frog222 on Thu Jan 16, 2025 10:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025

Total information collapse
It's started. And it's only going to accelerate from here.
Carole Cadwalladr Jan 13, 2025
https://broligarchy.substack.com/p/tota ... n-collapse
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 6:59 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
United are playing this evening so I'll probably just give this one a quick skim through afterwards before writing it up or I'll be up all night. Saying that there's potential there for some decent entertainment so we'll see.
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
Incapacity benefit cuts consultation was ‘misleading’ and unlawful, judge rules
https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... urt-ruling
A rare bit of good news this. The Tories held a sham consultation on cutting disability/sickness benefits which would have cost nearly half a million people £5000 a year and pushed a hundred thousand of them into absolute poverty. They lied, claiming it was all about helping claimants back into work when their own figures revealed their 'reforms' would only help around 3% to find a job. It was all about slashing support for the most vulnerable.
Labour had the opportunity to do the right thing, drop the court case, and begin working honestly and constructively with disability groups and charities. Did they do that? Did they fuck. They took up the Tory baton and ran with it. The theory being that they planned to ape most of the Tory reforms and continue to use the sham consultation as justification. If not, why continue to waste taxpayers money on a pointless court case?
Well now they've been informed by a high court judge that they won't be able to get away with it. Any proposals they come up with are going to have to have proper consultations done and be (and I can't believe I'm having to say this) actually legal.
It beggars belief that a Labour government would be forced to behave legally by the high court over a matter that's vitally important to the lives of hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people, but that's exactly where we find ourselves.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... urt-ruling
A rare bit of good news this. The Tories held a sham consultation on cutting disability/sickness benefits which would have cost nearly half a million people £5000 a year and pushed a hundred thousand of them into absolute poverty. They lied, claiming it was all about helping claimants back into work when their own figures revealed their 'reforms' would only help around 3% to find a job. It was all about slashing support for the most vulnerable.
Labour had the opportunity to do the right thing, drop the court case, and begin working honestly and constructively with disability groups and charities. Did they do that? Did they fuck. They took up the Tory baton and ran with it. The theory being that they planned to ape most of the Tory reforms and continue to use the sham consultation as justification. If not, why continue to waste taxpayers money on a pointless court case?
Well now they've been informed by a high court judge that they won't be able to get away with it. Any proposals they come up with are going to have to have proper consultations done and be (and I can't believe I'm having to say this) actually legal.
It beggars belief that a Labour government would be forced to behave legally by the high court over a matter that's vitally important to the lives of hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people, but that's exactly where we find ourselves.
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/ ... urt-battle
Indeed.
The judgement relates to Conservative proposals for the WCA, whilst Labour said they would be producing their own plans for benefits changes. Yet when Ellen’s case came to court, Labour fought hard to try to defeat it.
Because, the reality is that losing this case means that Labour will have to be honest about their proposals in the Spring, if they still intend to produce a green paper.
They will have to give clear information about the reasons for any changes, the number of people who are likely to be worse off and how much they are going to lose out by. And they will have to give disabled claimants sufficient time to consult with professionals if they need to, before responding.
Being open and honest about what they are doing is something the DWP have avoided for many years, so this ruling will be a major blow.
You can be sure that DWP ministers have already done so and are reading it with growing dismay.
Congratulations to Ellen Clifford on her courageous fight and genuinely important victory.
Indeed.
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
From the Guardian link, Patrick Butler --
A government spokesperson said: “The judge has found the previous government failed to adequately explain their proposals. As part of wider reforms that help people into work and ensure fiscal sustainability, the government will re-consult on the WCA descriptor changes, addressing the shortcomings in the previous consultation, in light of the judgment. The government intends to deliver the full level of savings in the public finances forecasts.”
Still cost-cutting then .
A government spokesperson said: “The judge has found the previous government failed to adequately explain their proposals. As part of wider reforms that help people into work and ensure fiscal sustainability, the government will re-consult on the WCA descriptor changes, addressing the shortcomings in the previous consultation, in light of the judgment. The government intends to deliver the full level of savings in the public finances forecasts.”
Still cost-cutting then .
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 6:59 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
RIP David Lynch.
The term "genius" is overused, but little doubt that there is a strong argument he deserves the accolade.
The term "genius" is overused, but little doubt that there is a strong argument he deserves the accolade.
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
The difference now is it will be all on them. Labour can't hide behind the sham consultation run by the Tories as they were attempting to do. The judgement against the DWP (and by extension Labour) was so comprehensive it's clear they'll have to satisfy a number of criteria or they'll lose in court again. So they will have to come clean about how many people will be affected, how much money they will lose, what mitigations will be put in place and how effective they will be, how many people do they expect to successfully find work, etc. And they will have to do that while holding a proper, legal consultation involving claimants, charities, etc over a number of months.
The judge today made it abundantly clear that what had been going on was appalling, and yes while ultimately Labour can do what they like within the law, at least now the option they were so vigorously pursuing of following the Tories in deliberately trying to sweep the consequences under the carpet is no longer a possibility.
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 6:59 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
Yeah, that looked like a holding statement from the government more than anything. Some stuff will have to change whether they like it or not.
Thank god for Amad eh!
Thank god for Amad eh!
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
Question Time was in Northampton this evening. A place I've visited once and that once was enough, but at least the audience were awake and lively which made a pleasant change after the last few programmes.
For Labour we had Chris Bryant. I've got a lot of time for Chris but he wasn't his usual rambunctious self this evening, which I suspect is something to do with him now being a government minister so he has to toe the line. As a result we were denied the entertainment of a genuine Bryant/Dorries confrontation as a hobbled Chris was forced to bite his tongue and behave himself. Consequently even when the subject turned to Musk Chris offered little besides the feeblest of anodyne criticism. His finest moment came at the end of the evening when he made what seemed a heartfelt argument against any return to austerity. Let's see if he's saying the same thing in a few months time if he's still a minister.
For the Tories we had Nadine Dorries. For once Mad Nads seemed sober, but that only helped make her sound more deranged knowing she was coming out with her nonsense without being three sheets to the wind. Most of it was the usual Tory crap hypocritically accusing others of doing/not doing stuff they did/didn't do themselves which got her laughed at a couple of times. But the loudest response she incited was the almighty audience wide groan she got when praising Musk. Nadine claimed he was the richest man in the world (he isn't, he's leveraged to fuck), the most successful man in the world (he isn't, just ask his kids, they fucking hate him), and a genius (he isn't, we just saw him boast he was brilliant at gaming then make an utter cock of himself while streaming it for all to see). She then rambled on as if we're all reliant on Starlink for our internet in the UK (we most certainly are not). But to be fair in doing so Nadine provided a valuable service. There was a vocal right wing minority in the audience tonight who let their voices be heard on other subjects, but when it came to Musk they didn't offer a peep despite Nadine's best efforts.
For the Lib Dems! We had Calum Miller. I could pretend I'd heard of Calum previous to this evening but I won't. First impressions however were favourable, he did a solid job and got a solid round of applause for making the case for closer cooperation with the EU.
(proceedings were interrupted here while I investigated the whining and barking coming from my garden and for the second year running got to see fox sex by torchlight - they seemed utterly unfazed by some idiot shining a 3000 lumens torch at them so I left them alone to get it on).
Where was I? Oh yeah, For GB news and the Telegraph we had Liam Halligan. Liam spent the beginning of the evening weirdly repeating that he could see people in the audience nodding as he talked as if he was desperately trying to persuade those of us watching that despite the silence the audience were agreeing with him. It was an odd thing to do, because as I previously mentioned there was a rump of right wingers who did applaud him eventually. It all went wrong for him though when while he was slagging off Reeves (while ironically making some valid points) a bloke called him out and asked him to provide solutions rather than simply criticising. Liam then made the mistake of obfuscating which didn't go well for him before finally being goaded into calling for tax cuts which again went down like a shit sandwich.
For ex Labour advisors we had Ayesha Hazarika. Ayesha seemed in sombre mood. Her evidently heartfelt take on the grooming gangs issue from a (female) Muslim perspective got her the loudest applause of the evening. She was also the only panellist who made the case for Reeves struggling because of what she inherited and the international bond market being chaos, but it sounded half hearted, like she was going through the motions.
(Not like Mr Fox and Mrs Fox who are going for it again with extremely loud gusto).
For Labour we had Chris Bryant. I've got a lot of time for Chris but he wasn't his usual rambunctious self this evening, which I suspect is something to do with him now being a government minister so he has to toe the line. As a result we were denied the entertainment of a genuine Bryant/Dorries confrontation as a hobbled Chris was forced to bite his tongue and behave himself. Consequently even when the subject turned to Musk Chris offered little besides the feeblest of anodyne criticism. His finest moment came at the end of the evening when he made what seemed a heartfelt argument against any return to austerity. Let's see if he's saying the same thing in a few months time if he's still a minister.
For the Tories we had Nadine Dorries. For once Mad Nads seemed sober, but that only helped make her sound more deranged knowing she was coming out with her nonsense without being three sheets to the wind. Most of it was the usual Tory crap hypocritically accusing others of doing/not doing stuff they did/didn't do themselves which got her laughed at a couple of times. But the loudest response she incited was the almighty audience wide groan she got when praising Musk. Nadine claimed he was the richest man in the world (he isn't, he's leveraged to fuck), the most successful man in the world (he isn't, just ask his kids, they fucking hate him), and a genius (he isn't, we just saw him boast he was brilliant at gaming then make an utter cock of himself while streaming it for all to see). She then rambled on as if we're all reliant on Starlink for our internet in the UK (we most certainly are not). But to be fair in doing so Nadine provided a valuable service. There was a vocal right wing minority in the audience tonight who let their voices be heard on other subjects, but when it came to Musk they didn't offer a peep despite Nadine's best efforts.
For the Lib Dems! We had Calum Miller. I could pretend I'd heard of Calum previous to this evening but I won't. First impressions however were favourable, he did a solid job and got a solid round of applause for making the case for closer cooperation with the EU.
(proceedings were interrupted here while I investigated the whining and barking coming from my garden and for the second year running got to see fox sex by torchlight - they seemed utterly unfazed by some idiot shining a 3000 lumens torch at them so I left them alone to get it on).
Where was I? Oh yeah, For GB news and the Telegraph we had Liam Halligan. Liam spent the beginning of the evening weirdly repeating that he could see people in the audience nodding as he talked as if he was desperately trying to persuade those of us watching that despite the silence the audience were agreeing with him. It was an odd thing to do, because as I previously mentioned there was a rump of right wingers who did applaud him eventually. It all went wrong for him though when while he was slagging off Reeves (while ironically making some valid points) a bloke called him out and asked him to provide solutions rather than simply criticising. Liam then made the mistake of obfuscating which didn't go well for him before finally being goaded into calling for tax cuts which again went down like a shit sandwich.
For ex Labour advisors we had Ayesha Hazarika. Ayesha seemed in sombre mood. Her evidently heartfelt take on the grooming gangs issue from a (female) Muslim perspective got her the loudest applause of the evening. She was also the only panellist who made the case for Reeves struggling because of what she inherited and the international bond market being chaos, but it sounded half hearted, like she was going through the motions.
(Not like Mr Fox and Mrs Fox who are going for it again with extremely loud gusto).
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
Agreed, it was definitely a holding statement. This could set them back for a year. Let me ask you AK, as a supporter of this government how does them continuing a Tory court case to try to hide the impact of denying half a million sick and disabled people their benefits make you feel? Because that's exactly what they were doing in the hope they could do the same themselves.AnatolyKasparov wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:02 pm Yeah, that looked like a holding statement from the government more than anything. Some stuff will have to change whether they like it or not.
Thank god for Amad eh!
As for United. Never mind Amad. If it hadn't been for Onana Southampton would have been out of sight by half time. They absolutely battered us for an hour at home.
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 6:59 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
Well given the news tonight that Dorries gushing over Musk is all the funnier. Yes, a genius!
- Sky'sGoneOut
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:53 pm
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Thursday 16th January 2025
Absolutely. Still got my old Eraserhead t-shirt I bought from a shop on Cockburn street in Edinburgh in about 1986 and wore for about 10 years (not continuously).AnatolyKasparov wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 7:18 pm RIP David Lynch.
The term "genius" is overused, but little doubt that there is a strong argument he deserves the accolade.