27 Comments
User's avatar
John Brophy's avatar

We will not comply. Make the Brit card obligatory if you want a Covid shot. For the rest, I can show a driver´s license or a passport. Keep cash and use it - don´t shop where they frown at you. Keir is on the way out and he took one for the team with this last gasp desperate attempt at digital gulag.

Expand full comment
Susie AH's avatar

I love hedgehogs too Frank. I do hope yours wasn’t walking about in the daylight, it’s a sign it is sick. We have a hedgehog which I rarely see and also a toad (which jumps out and makes me shriek from time 😂). Both of them keep the slug population down.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Oh no! Hedgington was out just after dusk. I listen to hedgie rescue ladies who advise about distressed hedgies and I am happy to report dear H was in the pink. In fact, the biggest healthiest hedgie I have ever seen. They are beautiful little things.

Expand full comment
Susie AH's avatar

They are wonderful creatures (although full of fleas). When I was a little girl, my dad used to keep gardening gloves in the boot of his car so that if he came across one walking by or on the road, he could pick it up and place it somewhere safe. There were many hedgehogs around in those days but sadly not many now.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Oh bless him. I wonder how many hedgies we have today are here because your dad saved their forebears.

Expand full comment
Pablo Singh's avatar

Frank- the Christian Identity mentioned by the SPLC/ADL isn't like a cultural identity, its a particular sect that believes in British/Germanic people were the Israelites of the old testament.

It still shouldn't be called a "hate group", nor should there be any such para-state NGOs labeling people, but just wanted to clear up the confusion. Its a uniquely kooky American wignat thing.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Oh yes, but there is plenty more. The ADL glossary of hate and extremism had more than a few entries on Catholics, Christians and so on. I had to reach for the low hanging fruit for time constraints. Quite right pablo, thank you for keeping me honest

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

It being all deleted now it takes time to bring it up where archived so apologies

Expand full comment
Pablo Singh's avatar

"Traditionalist Catholics" was my favorite. Italian grandmothers and people with 8 kids are plotting on you.

Expand full comment
J B's avatar

Thanks for reporting the truth Frank. Always enjoy the news updates and optimism despite the dire circumstances

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Oh thank you for saying so JB. I do try to get at the truth, and I hope to be honest about it when I don’t.

There’s immense potential in this moment, and a lot of good may come with what comes next.

Expand full comment
Susan's avatar

Thank you for your brilliant news round up 🙏

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Thank you Susan! I missed a bit here and there.

The British police shot two Jews at the synagogue- killing one and critically injuring the second.

The would be suicide bomber - Jihad Al-Shamie, was a rapist who was granted bail by our judges.

Responsible Statecraft reported that Israel is paying influencers up to $7000 per post to spread their propaganda.

A short Englishman with a dodgy moustache and a throttled social media presence has been seen hastily packing his bags. Known only as “FW”, he was heard making “cha-ching” sounds whilst muttering about wearing “that little hat” and going to visit “the paywall”.

Expand full comment
Alan Devincentis's avatar

One point I’d like to make regarding the section on civilian casualties. There is no such thing as a Gazan civilian. Not one. When you realize that,it changes tte dynamic, big time.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

How did you come to this understanding Alan? Can you explain your thinking?

Perhaps you could give us a list of who isn’t a civilian, and why, and what a civilian is, and what it isn’t?

Expand full comment
JD's avatar

I think it was Schmitt who made the point that universal suffrage type democracy blurs the lines between professional soldiers and civilians under a centralized state; they voted for the foreign policy and are all involved, unlike the medieval system where warfare affected civilians less directly where monarchs and nobles might engage in warfare that was more personal to them and less a national effort; cabinet wars.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Did he? Curious take, which presumes (rather naively) that liberal democracy is honest and which ignores the vanishing consent of those who voted against the winning party.

The idea that there’s no civilians does require a defence outside political theory. When it’s a matter of killing it is rather more pressing whatwhat.

Expand full comment
JD's avatar

My, possibly flawed, understanding is that the thesis, whether desirable or not, is that universal suffrage and the concept of popular sovereignty logically draw everyone into a conflict as it becomes always war between nations in which the entire population (minus children and, before lady voting, women) is in fact the sovereign.

The entire nation takes part in the conflict in one way or another and thus the field of legitimate targets widens its compass; what Clausey called ‘total war’, in contrast to a mercenary army of professional soldiers who fought each other, more independently of the wider population in cabinet wars.

A very generalised argument, likely somewhat misrepresented here, but makes the point that the concept of popular sovereignty by its own internal logic, legitimates the military targeting of the entire nation. Massification of society => massification of warfare.

I’m not offering it as an excuse for carpet bombing any particular state or city.

Expand full comment
JD's avatar

Nor am I trying to speak for Alain of wine hundredths above, who should explain himself

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

This of course permissions terrorism, as the argument is advanced that a democratic nation wages war by popular consent - and so attacks on its civilians are legitimate as they are permissioning war on your people.

You can only escape this trap by admitting that this is not true, of course. And so the rulers make targets of the ruled without their consent behind its pretence.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

Of course this argument, if supported honestly, speaks to justify the actions of your enemies as well as yours. A dangerous game. In practice this reasoning means anyone is a target, which I would argue is the justification of universal vengeance. That is madness, but such is war without limits. I think this a superlative to the doctrine of total war.

Expand full comment
JD's avatar

Precisement. As binLaden pointed out.

Maybe we have to admit that popular sovereignty is not, in fact, true.

Expand full comment
Frank Wright's avatar

That is a very good explanation and I now consider myself telt. Thank you.

Bonus points for “lady voting”

Expand full comment
JD's avatar

Thank you. Can I redeem my points at the pub?

Expand full comment
The Echoing Green's avatar

Haven't even read this yet, so incoming tangent - Just wanted to say, first of all, I love you, secondly I was thinking today how probably wonderful a regular spot with you and Nina Power would be! I might be wrong, but how about an interview to gauge chemistry..?

Expand full comment