More conspiracy nutjobbing from the Tories.

As I write these words, I am sitting at home in Tel Aviv, trying to figure out how to protect my family in a house with no shelter or safe room, following with growing panic the reports and rumors of horrible events taking place in the Israeli towns near Gaza which are under attack. I see people, some of them my friends, calling on social media to attack Gaza more fiercely than ever before. Some Israelis are saying that now is the time to eradicate Gaza entirely — essentially calling for genocide. Through all the explosions, the dread and the bloodshed, speaking about peaceful solutions seems like madness to them.

Yet I remember that everything that I am feeling now, which every Israeli must be sharing, has been the life experience of millions of Palestinians for far too long. The only solution, as it has always been, is to bring an end of apartheid, occupation, and siege, and promote a future based on justice and equality for all of us. It is not in spite of the horror that we have to change course — it is exactly because of it.

Single people’s invisibility is part of a larger, longer shift in politics towards proving that government is only there for people who deserve support. Families are more deserving than singles, and “working people” are more deserving than people who aren’t in work, cannot work due to disability or illness, or do care work that is unrecognised and unpaid. It was back in 2005 that the BBC noted the ubiquity of the phrase “hard-working families” in New Labour rhetoric, and so it is no surprise that it has been revived in the current party’s tribute act to that era. “It has always been a Tory message,” the Times columnist and former Conservative MP Matthew Parris told the BBC at the time. “It is nothing new from the Tories, but both Gordon Brown and Tony Blair want to rid the Labour party of this association with handouts to people. It chimes in very well with New Labour, this idea of no free rides and no feather-bedding.”

No mods listed and the place is getting overrun by drug spam. Is there anyone there?

The PSA said it had "very strict rules" for connection services, and enforcement action is taken if providers break these rules.

It also said it would cap all call costs at £40 from 18 September.

Fear the regulator! Only £40 for a call that should be free!

Here's the other sort of PSA (from the link):

How to spot a call connection service:

• Official numbers usually begin 01, 02, 03 or 0800

• If the number beings 09, 087 or 084, it is likely to be a connection service and will cost more

• When searching for a number on a search engine, be aware that the first number may not be the one you are looking for

• Look out for paid-for ads - these may be connection services.

Reasonably speedy retraction this time, six months from when the problems were first noted on PubPeer (https://pubpeer.com/publications/58E5F4120AB02E9565E3B4DE303EC3). Nine years after publication...

Elisabeth Bik is doing an incredible job. Her toot for this retraction: https://med-mastodon.com/@ElisabethBik/110969401224111581

"In their letter to the Home Office, lawyers for the FBU cited media reports which said the Bibby Stockholm had only 222 single-occupancy rooms, but that additional beds had been placed in each in order to to increase the capacity to 506.

"Other reports said that, while the barge had three fire exits, one was not operational because it was at the end of a gangway that had been deemed too steep to be safely used.

"A whistleblower in the local authority is also quoted as telling the Times that fire checks in July had led to serious safety concerns and describing the barge as having the potential to become a "floating Grenfell"."

"When a British politician discusses “tough choices”, they invariably reveal whose side they are really on. A tough choice tends to involve emptying the pockets of those with little, or slashing a service ordinary citizens depend on. When Labour committed to retain the Tories’ two-child benefit cap – which drives hundreds of thousands of children into poverty – this was styled as a tough decision. Note, however, that raising taxes on the thriving rich is never described as such, even though such a commitment inevitably triggers coordinated hysteria from Tory politicians, rightwing media outlets and wealthy interests. Refusing to do so is the easy way out: it is the very opposite of a tough decision."

I haven't seen a lot about the background to this dispute, so I thought people might be interested. This was published soon after the final, before the forcible kiss became a scandal.

“We, the undersigned, are concerned that your current economic programme for government will not transform the economic orthodoxy that has made this country poorer, less cohesive and more unequal than fifteen years ago,” the letter says.

“The maintenance or extension of cuts in the current economic climate will only serve to deepen the poverty and hardship many are already facing.

“We believe it is the duty of an opposition to, where necessary, present an alternative vision for the future and when it comes to economics.”