Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The reason the Corbyn “stupid row” continues to make news is b

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited December 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The reason the Corbyn “stupid row” continues to make news is because many don’t believe his denial

This doesn't look like the right strategy for the LAB leader. Corbyn hits out at media over 'stupid woman' row. https://t.co/CGqjw0avA2

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,846
    Does this story have legs? The Gatwick drone thing is far more interesting.
  • His comments will keep the fires burning within the hearts of his followers, who will see Grandpa being picked on by right-wing BBC.

    The rest of the voters will running around trying to sort Xmas in time.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,664
    edited December 2018
    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    The cops are now finally trying to shoot these blasted drones down. Something close to a national embarrassment is playing out in front of the world's eyes. Britain crippled by a couple of toy aircraft.
  • shropshireladshropshirelad Posts: 3
    edited December 2018
    Anazina said:

    The cops are now finally trying to shoot these blasted drones down. Something close to a national embarrassment is playing out in front of the world's eyes. Britain crippled by a couple of toy aircraft.

    Even more stupid if we allowed flights and one crashed .must you find every eventuality to criticise us?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,245
    Could it be Corbyn flying the drones?

    He's a bit Greeny and he might want to take the attention off himself (Fess up and put it behind you).

    Someone on the previous thread suggested it might be a Grandad, but this looks more deliberate.

    Any odds on Caroline Lucas?


  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996
    Anazina said:

    The cops are now finally trying to shoot these blasted drones down. Something close to a national embarrassment is playing out in front of the world's eyes. Britain crippled by a couple of toy aircraft.

    Crippled?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 2,155
    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 626
    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    All of parliament is a pantomime.
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 626
    notme2 said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    All of parliament is a pantomime.
    Oh no it isnt...
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    CD13 said:

    Could it be Corbyn flying the drones?

    He's a bit Greeny and he might want to take the attention off himself (Fess up and put it behind you).

    Someone on the previous thread suggested it might be a Grandad, but this looks more deliberate.

    Any odds on Caroline Lucas?


    My money is on Stewart Jackson.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996
    Scott_P said:
    A trident strike, as Jonathan alluded to on the previous thread? :D
  • Guardian pol blog:

    "I’ll be wrapping up the blog in about an hour so so. And then I’m not expecting to be blogging again until Monday 7 January, when the Commons returns after the Christmas recess."

    Let's hope everyone has calmed down a bit by then and we can sort this mess out sensibly.
  • AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    There's a near miss every month or so.

    I imagine Gatwick did indeed have both preventative and contingency plans.
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 626
    RobD said:

    Anazina said:

    The cops are now finally trying to shoot these blasted drones down. Something close to a national embarrassment is playing out in front of the world's eyes. Britain crippled by a couple of toy aircraft.

    Crippled?
    do we know these are toys?
  • AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
  • notme2 said:

    RobD said:

    Anazina said:

    The cops are now finally trying to shoot these blasted drones down. Something close to a national embarrassment is playing out in front of the world's eyes. Britain crippled by a couple of toy aircraft.

    Crippled?
    do we know these are toys?
    "industrial specification".

    which is very specific language.

    Also, there have been two periods when they've definitely been deployed.

    “They were over the perimeter fence and into where the runway operates from. They disappeared and reappeared over the night period from 9pm until 3am at which point we reopened the runway. That lasted for 45 minutes before the drones reappeared again."
  • Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.
  • AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Is John McTiernan Jr behind the drones, testing the viability of a new Die Hard plot?
  • Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    I most like the vaguest of attempts to argue he didn't say nothing but without really putting yourself on the line. It's good.
  • On topic, everyone has already formed their view of Jeremy Corbyn. If he can survive laying a wreath for dead terrorists, he can survive calling the Prime Minister a stupid woman.
  • The idea of the armed forces being called in to Gatwick conjures up a picture of chaps with handlebar moustaches leaning out of Sopwiths with butterfly nets, trying to catch the little blighters.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    A trident strike, as Jonathan alluded to on the previous thread? :D
    Does Williamson even know what the military can and will do? I doubt it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 49,993

    On topic, everyone has already formed their view of Jeremy Corbyn. If he can survive laying a wreath for dead terrorists, he can survive calling the Prime Minister a stupid woman.

    He's quoted Karl Marx verbatim today :p
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996
    Oh, and the beauty of using Trident is the electromagnetic pulse is sure to disable any drone in the vicinity of the airport. There may be some other, minor effects, but those are hardly worth mentioning.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996
    Anazina said:

    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1075783462701985793

    A trident strike, as Jonathan alluded to on the previous thread? :D
    Does Williamson even know what the military can and will do? I doubt it.
    You're probably right there...
  • The idea of the armed forces being called in to Gatwick conjures up a picture of chaps with handlebar moustaches leaning out of Sopwiths with butterfly nets, trying to catch the little blighters.

    http://24.media.tumblr.com/ddc8907de85e193f3a285115af151643/tumblr_mh6sgpz1E51s32n64o1_500.png
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    A phrase apt for any day of one's life.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,895
    Scott_P said:
    Will be fishing nets to throw over the drone.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,859
    Jonathan said:

    Does this story have legs? The Gatwick drone thing is far more interesting.

    The Mail is excitedly anti-JC (again). The other coverage is mostly on the lines of "politicians playing games while Rome burns". I can see a real media narrative building up not that Brexit has been betrayed but that the political class has failed us all.
  • Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
  • Guardian pol blog:

    "I’ll be wrapping up the blog in about an hour so so. And then I’m not expecting to be blogging again until Monday 7 January, when the Commons returns after the Christmas recess."

    Let's hope everyone has calmed down a bit by then and we can sort this mess out sensibly.

    100% agree
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    I'm amazed that Labour seems to treat with such little urgency finding a credible path for Corbyn to retire gracefully and be replaced with a more competent leader.

    Practically. the jig will be up only when McDonnell says it's up, and for now, he seems to be happy to let his lifelong friend carry on his little games.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,895
    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    May by a long way, evil nasty woman
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,208
    Scott_P said:
    If I was anywhere near Gatwick, I’d stay indoors and switch off anything electronic. If the military are getting their toys out there could well be some unintended disruption.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634
    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Given that PMQs has always been pantomime...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 49,993
    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    I must say, the poking at him over the dispatch box was most unseemly.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,330
    Corbyn could have apologised if he had chosen to at the time, the story would have died down, but instead Abbott, Pidcock denied hearing anything and helped keep the story going since yesterday afternoon.

    He might even recall a fuss almost 30 years ago when a honourable Member was called a stupid woman, as he was in the chamber at the time.

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm198889/cmhansrd/1989-01-20/Debate-5.html

    Mr. Holt : I could not possibly call the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) an intelligent woman.
  • Remote-controlled model helicopters have been around for decades, and I don't recall any airports being shut down because of them. I sense the government's dark hand in this. They're giving us a taste of the civil disruption that a hard Brexit will bring, to soften us up in favour of Theresa's deal.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,895

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    G , a blind man could see he was saying that, fact is he was right and should have been shouting it out.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 2,092
    edited December 2018
    Jonathan said:

    Does this story have legs? The Gatwick drone thing is far more interesting.

    I find it quite endearing to have a front line politician who is such an inept liar when under pressure.

    The takeaway for Team Corbyn is that if you are going to make up fairy stories about what he said, then don't choose an alternative word with exactly the opposite mouth movements. It ain't very credible.

    Agree with Alistair, that this will confirm opinions whether for skeptics or groupies. This has shades of his memorial to the terrorists where iirc one version of his many dissemblings (was it 4 or 5 lots of fairytales on that occasion?) was was to claim to have been at a memorial that isn't even in the graveyard.

    Presumably the allotment is being turned over exclusively to faceplants.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 9,330
  • ChrisChris Posts: 2,155

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I checked, Corbyn was a man :o
  • Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,859
    Lovely Guardian report on Putin's statement opposing a second referendum:

    "Showing a concern for the sanctity of democracy which has not always been a hallmark of his career, Putin argued that the will of the people must be respected."

    I'm not one of those "British is always best" types, but I do think we win on elegant irony.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,208

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    The CAA requirements for a commercial drone operation are not dissimilar to those for manned aircraft operations, include ground school and a flying test for pilots and production of operating procedures by the company.

    What’s going on at Gatwick appears to be the quite deliberate misuse of the sort of drones used commercially, some organised group must be behind it and it’s surprising we haven’t heard from them yet. Many other groups are going to see what’s going on and see the amount of disruption that can be caused by only a few people.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 14,814

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    There are tons of 'accidental' incidents at Uk airports
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
    Did you forget you aren't allowed to assume gender?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 14,814

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    Alastair using Sharon & Tracey International Airport, who'd a thunk it? I do hope you weren't wearing that ribena suit.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 2,155

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
    Please. You're making it worse.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    RobD said:

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I checked, Corbyn was a man :o
    You've checked?
  • Donny43 said:

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
    Did you forget you aren't allowed to assume gender?
    I am 75 and not au fait with these ideas
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996
    Anazina said:

    RobD said:

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I checked, Corbyn was a man :o
    You've checked?
    I thought that had nothing to do with gender these days? :p
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 14,081
    malcolmg said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    G , a blind man could see he was saying that, fact is he was right and should have been shouting it out.
    LIKE!!!!!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 2,092

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    I think that since April it is up to 5 years for endangering an aircraft, which I hope would apply here. Is there a linked "conspiracy to" offense?

    As for whom, I can see the same type of people who try to close down power stations doing this stuff - conceivably militant evironmental types protesting against the rather creative runway use changes pending at Gatwick?
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Donny43 said:

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    He's not _my_ man. And perhaps you'd be wise to avoid using such sexist language in the present climate. ;-)
    Last time I looked Corbyn was a man
    Did you forget you aren't allowed to assume gender?
    I am 75 and not au fait with these ideas
    I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Remote-controlled model helicopters have been around for decades, and I don't recall any airports being shut down because of them. I sense the government's dark hand in this. They're giving us a taste of the civil disruption that a hard Brexit will bring, to soften us up in favour of Theresa's deal.

    Next up, deliberately laying leaves on the railways.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 1,275
    edited December 2018
    There's photos going round Twitter of some French bloke sharing arial photos of Gatwick on Facebook.

    EDIT: Looks to be a hoax. Ignore.
  • mattmatt Posts: 2,525

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 1,539
    He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.

    Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.

    If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 14,814

    Jonathan said:

    Does this story have legs? The Gatwick drone thing is far more interesting.

    The Mail is excitedly anti-JC (again). The other coverage is mostly on the lines of "politicians playing games while Rome burns". I can see a real media narrative building up not that Brexit has been betrayed but that the political class has failed us all.
    It would be a logical conclusion to Brexit to decide that since both Tories and Labour are clearly incapable of taking control of anything, we're better off leaving the EU in charge of our regulations. They at least got their act together quickly and have been remarkably efficient in working from a common position and responding to issues quickly.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.

    I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.

    Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.
  • IanB2 said:

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    Alastair using Sharon & Tracey International Airport, who'd a thunk it? I do hope you weren't wearing that ribena suit.
    I can blend into any environment. I've since changed out of the tracksuit and singlet.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 25,885

    There's photos going round Twitter of some French bloke sharing arial photos of Gatwick on Facebook.

    I think it's a joke and the photos come from here.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3734916/The-hypnotic-view-Fascinating-aerial-photographs-London-s-Gatwick-Airport-ve-never-seen-before.html
  • malcolmg said:

    Chris said:

    Just out of interest, which did people find more repellent - whatever Corbyn said, or May's pantomime turn at the despatch box?

    Looks like the Sky Data Poll nails your man 60% he did call TM stupid woman - 12% he did not
    G , a blind man could see he was saying that, fact is he was right and should have been shouting it out.
    LIKE!!!!!
    Malc and I have our moments but he is very special on this forum and I think his comment is funny
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996

    There's photos going round Twitter of some French bloke sharing arial photos of Gatwick on Facebook.

    I think it's a joke and the photos come from here.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3734916/The-hypnotic-view-Fascinating-aerial-photographs-London-s-Gatwick-Airport-ve-never-seen-before.html
    Fake news? In this day and age?
  • Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    The CAA requirements for a commercial drone operation are not dissimilar to those for manned aircraft operations, include ground school and a flying test for pilots and production of operating procedures by the company.

    What’s going on at Gatwick appears to be the quite deliberate misuse of the sort of drones used commercially, some organised group must be behind it and it’s surprising we haven’t heard from them yet. Many other groups are going to see what’s going on and see the amount of disruption that can be caused by only a few people.
    Yep I am aware of the requirements having done the school. I use a drone for photographing archaeological sites as part of my consultancy work.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 14,814
    matt said:

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
    That was my first solo landaway, sprung on me by my instructor one afternoon when I was in PPL training. He sent me off saying "if you see the sea underneath the plane, you've missed the airport and gone too far; turn round and come back".
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 14,081
    matt said:

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
    Southend Airport is a very pleasant place, for an airport. Considerably, by a considerable stretch, better than Stansted.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 1,275

    There's photos going round Twitter of some French bloke sharing arial photos of Gatwick on Facebook.

    I think it's a joke and the photos come from here.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3734916/The-hypnotic-view-Fascinating-aerial-photographs-London-s-Gatwick-Airport-ve-never-seen-before.html
    I think you're right. Silly me.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Scott_P said:
    A seriously good end-of-term piece by Kellner. Good to see somebody is working this week.
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 626

    Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.

    I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.

    Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.

    just remember, this kind of thing blows both ways...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 1,539
    IanB2 said:

    It would be a logical conclusion to Brexit to decide that since both Tories and Labour are clearly incapable of taking control of anything, we're better off leaving the EU in charge of our regulations. They at least got their act together quickly and have been remarkably efficient in working from a common position and responding to issues quickly.

    Perhaps meant satirically but IMO a good point.

    Who do you want deciding on what shape your banana should be? An expert in that particular topic who works in Brussels or Owen Patterson?

    It's at the very least debatable.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,584
    edited December 2018
    Hitting out at the media is precisely the right strategy for the British version of Trump (the more personally frugal, still more polite version).

    But whether he said it or not it is another example where Corbyn gets petty and ranty when the media annoys him. E.g. his 'can we have a question on the nhs' moment.

    Really he's fine as plenty of non fans are unclear if he did say what is alleged, so anger at the naughty media plays to his base.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,426
    I think most people believe he said "stupid woman" because that's the way the narrative was framed - both by the initial outcry from the Tory benches, and then by the media. It isn't what he said though, and I don't think he'd make things better for himself (and the whole thing isn't important enough anyway) if he lied that that's what he said.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,098
    kinabalu said:

    He was only muttering what most people were thinking as she launched into that cruel and bullying pantomime routine. She was mocking him. Mocking him in front of his own MPs and inviting her own MPs to laugh along. Hardly surprising that Jeremy felt the need to retaliate. I bet what he really wanted to do was get up and slap her round the chops. Yet he did not do that. No violence whatsoever. Mark of the man.

    Still, to be serious, has he not stood up and lied to the House of Commons? Yes, he undeniably has. Therefore could this not, trivial as it seems to many, lead to a scandal which grows and grows until the only way to end it is for him to stand down as Labour leader? Unlikely. Very unlikely indeed. But not impossible.

    If so, what a time for that to happen, right slap bang in the middle of the biggest political crisis that this country has seen for many a year!

    A new Labour leader, or even Tom Watson as interim leader would be a very interesting development.

    Though I think the real significance of the row is to make some sort of negotiated Labour support for the Deal even less likely. An olive branch would have been better from TM, but she is too partisan.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 25,581
    Anazina said:

    Scott_P said:
    A seriously good end-of-term piece by Kellner. Good to see somebody is working this week.
    Judging by the recent polls I've seen, I don't think that support for staying in the EU has "rocketed."

    And, the question that saw Labour support fall to 22% was extremely leading.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,208
    MattW said:

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    I think that since April it is up to 5 years for endangering an aircraft, which I hope would apply here. Is there a linked "conspiracy to" offense?

    As for whom, I can see the same type of people who try to close down power stations doing this stuff - conceivably militant evironmental types protesting against the rather creative runway use changes pending at Gatwick?
    Five years for endangering an aircraft is correct. There’s plenty of other offences with higher penalties, such as those under the various terrorist legislation, should 5e CPS be inclined. The culprits had better not have any assets either, because the civil suits will be immense if the airlines sue them for the cost of diversions.

    The new runway use proposals at LGW are certainly creative, that’s for sure. It’s currently the world’s busiest single-runway airport.

  • Jewish Telegraph
    ‏Verified account @JewishTelegraph

    #BREAKING: MP Ivan Lewis has quit the Labour Party after more than 20 years as MP for Bury South, citing leader Jeremy Corbyn's failure to deal with the party's #antisemitism crisis as his main reason.
  • matt said:

    Glad I flew out of Southend this morning.

    I’d be glad to fly out of Southend too. Drive or walk as well.
    Southend Airport is a very pleasant place, for an airport. Considerably, by a considerable stretch, better than Stansted.
    Don't let them in on the secret.
  • Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.

    I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.

    Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.

    As a mail plus subscriber it has only moved towards the sunday mail editorial. The daily mail was full on brexit and now the whole paper is more moderate and is generally in the centre ground
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 626
    Scott_P said:
    Except the one that counted. Polls were clear people wanted Ed Miliband as PM.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,437


    Seems like a majority of people think he did say stupid woman but that it’s not actually sexist.

    I think I would agree with that. The woman part of stupid woman is simply for lack of a different term. I could just as easily see May calling Corbyn a stupid man, but stupid person doesn’t really sound natural, I think most people would use woman/man in this context. He clearly shouldn’t have said it but I don’t see this story lasting much longer, it was just a nice distraction from Brexit.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Oh, btw, I was talking to an acquaintance recently, who is married to a Daily Mail journalist, about the Mail's dramatic and suddenly shift in editorial line.

    I was reliably told, and this is not something I'd heard here, that the shift in editorial tone was largely necessitated by the Stop Funding Hate campaign.

    Apparently SFH managed to convince so many advertisers to pull their contracts with the Mail that Rothermere was convinced that it was an existential threat to the paper unless they shifted to an editorial line that advertisers were comfortable with.

    Interesting background – I can see that that might be true. Also, Geordie Grieg (the new editor) is a world away from the odious Paul Dacre's politics. Greig is a sort of europhile, metropolitan liberal Tory. It's a completely different newspaper these days.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited December 2018
    Donny43 said:


    I actually got an email at work today from someone whose signature includes the line My pronouns are she, her and hers.

    When trans/intersex/genderqueer people give out their preferred pronouns as they do their name as a matter of course, it strips transphobes of plausible deniability when misgendering and deadnaming people maliciously. And for everyone else, it forestalls potential awkwardness and should be viewed as an act of politeness.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,584
    Scott_P said:
    And we should always make decisions based on sharp increases on polling for one side as that will never change as PM of a huge majority T May could tell us.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,362
    Ivan Lewis, Labour MP for Bury South, has resigned from the party citing its failure to address anti semitism.
  • Carolus_RexCarolus_Rex Posts: 1,391
    Scott_P said:
    to lose one MP in a week may be accounted a misfortune...
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,321

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
    This was last week in Mexico
    https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/14/passenger-plane-left-gaping-hole-crashing-drone-8249661/

    It resembles the damage caused by a large bird
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4543186/bird-strike-boeing-737-sudan/

    We don't close airports because of flocks of geese. Just carry on flying.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,996

    AndyJS said:

    This was four years ago. There should have had a contingency plan for the Gatwick situation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30369701

    Not sure what contingency plans you can have. Planes and drones simply don't mix and there is a big enough exclusion zone around airports than no one can do it 'by accident'.

    The Government is introducing tougher rules for drones and anyone who wants to fly one for commercial reasons already needs a CAA licence. But if someone actually wants to cause disruption or worse an accident there is not that much more the airport can do proactively to prevent it. All their actions are likely to be reactive.
    The contingency plans will be around how to manage disruption.
    This was last week in Mexico
    https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/14/passenger-plane-left-gaping-hole-crashing-drone-8249661/

    It resembles the damage caused by a large bird
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4543186/bird-strike-boeing-737-sudan/

    We don't close airports because of flocks of geese. Just carry on flying.
    But a drone could be used maliciously. I don't think we have developed the technology to pilot geese.
This discussion has been closed.