Andrew Rugman

consult:

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@michalbrojak @nicbstme From Notion to Logseq?

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@FondOfBeetles @Aidan19xx I read this last year, and found it quite enlightening. https://t.co/kNqebHOg2M

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@optux_ai @DynamicWebPaige @antigravity I was wondering this too, so I fed your screenshot to Google Lens. Cheers! https://t.co/Mnruxv7Ygz

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@USAP09 @LondonTheatre1 @FPLMate Racial abuse is a hate crime, and should be reported to the police, either on 101 or to your local police force.

[Nicole Lampert @nicolelampert]

This speaks to a much bigger problem than simply a few people unhappy about Israel/ Palestine.

‘Far-left activists, including some who cast violent Islamism as the voice of the “oppressed”, have gained influence at institutional levels. As a profound believer in academic freedom, I would never wish to see them excluded. But academia needs a culture shift to prevent them from excluding others.’

[John Spencer @SpencerGuard]

https://t.co/jzxn7fMiMB

[David Collier @mishtal]

Exclusive:

This is not the face of famine. It is the face of a medically vulnerable child whose tragic situation was hijacked and weaponised.

Exposing the truth behind the viral Gaza 'famine' image of Mohammed Al-Matouq. 1/13
🧵⬇️⬇️⬇️

[Dan Hitchens @ddhitchens]

Today Libby Purves describes the bill as “being steered from the back like a clown car.”

Other descriptions include “amateur hour” (Matthew D’Ancona), “beyond a joke” (John Lamont), “never seen a bill less up to scratch” (Richard Garside), etc etc.

Is all this fair? A timeline:

[Dan Hitchens @ddhitchens]

25 questions for @kimleadbeater:

1. You’ve suggested that feeling like “a burden” could be a “legitimate” reason to ask for an assisted suicide, and you rejected an amendment to rule this out. How common do you think it is for terminally ill people to feel like a burden?

2. If a terminally ill person asks for assisted suicide only because they are on a long waiting list for treatment, the authorities will have to approve the suicide. Do you think that’s a legitimate reason too?

3. If a terminally ill person asks for assisted suicide only because they are depressed, the request must be approved. Why did you reject an amendment that doctors must at least check for remediable suicide risk factors?

4. Studies have found that “six months” is an extremely unreliable category, and DWP figures show that 20% of those given a six-month diagnosis are still alive three years later. Are you comfortable with thousands of people receiving an assisted death who had years of life ahead of them?

5. You say this is to help people in intractable pain. Why did you reject an amendment which would have specified that pain must be the reason for the assisted suicide?

6. You’ve amended the meaning of the NHS’s founding principles, in order to incorporate assisted suicide into the NHS. Do you accept the BMA’s view that “assisted dying is not a ‘treatment option’ in the conventional sense”?

7. The government has said it is open to private provision as long as it’s free at the point of use. Would you be comfortable with Serco or Capita providing this service?

8. The Times reported that you were considering an amendment to cap private providers’ profits at “reasonable” levels. That amendment was never tabled. Why not?

9. Doctors are allowed to raise the subject when the patient hasn’t mentioned it (you rejected an amendment to rule this out). Do you have any worries that this will lead vulnerable patients towards assisted suicide who otherwise wouldn’t have considered it?

10. Doctors can also raise the procedure with under-18s (who aren’t yet eligible). You rejected an amendment to change this, saying that “open conversations…create…safeguards”. Which safeguards are created by allowing doctors to raise assisted suicide with children?

11. Why do the new panels not have any requirement to ask anybody a single question? (They just have to “hear from” two people, and it could be over audio link.)

12. The Royal College of Psychiatrists have strongly criticised some of the bill’s provisions. Why did you originally block them from giving oral evidence, and why did you not consult them before announcing they would have to staff the new panels?

13. The panels have no power of summons: so if they suspect a woman might be being coerced by her husband, and they ask him to answer questions, he can just ignore them. Why have you made the panels so weak?

14. You have alluded to Sir James Munby’s critique as a reason for dropping the High Court safeguard, but he says of the panels that “The Bill still falls lamentably short of providing adequate safeguards.” Why was he right before and wrong now?

15. You repeatedly cite the lawyers’ letter in support of the panel. Do you know why, of the 25 KCs who previously signed a letter supporting your bill with the High Court safeguard, only 11 signed the letter supporting it with the new panels?

16. You cite public polling. But Jake Richards, a co-sponsor of the bill, has pointed out that “When you unpack that a bit, the polling is a bit more ambivalent, and I think it’s important to be honest about that. So I don’t think it’s an overwhelming case in terms of public opinion.” Is he right that this is a test of honesty?

17. Panels will have to assess coercion according to civil law – i.e. on the balance of probabilities: so if the panel thinks “coercion” is only 49% likely, they have to approve the application. Why did you reject an amendment requiring the absence of coercion to be proved beyond reasonable doubt?

18. Prof Jane Monckton-Smith OBE, a leading authority on coercive control, says: “Unless we do take this incredibly seriously, this bill is going to be the worst thing potentially that we have ever done to domestic abuse victims.” Are you confident you have done enough to reassure her?

19. You say the assessors will pick up on coercion. 50% of coercive control cases are dropped for lack of evidence, and only around 5 per cent of recorded coercive control crimes result in a charge. How will you make the doctors’ and panels’ checks on coercion any better than the police’s?

20. You accepted Jess Asato’s amendment to require training on coercion. She is still wholly opposed to the bill, and says: “We cannot end up in a situation like Australia, where AD domestic abuse training forms part of a 40-60 minute self-guided online module.” Can you guarantee it will be anything more than that?

21. Experts including a former attorney general and Dr Alexandra Mullock recommended that you ban “encouragement” of assisted suicide as well as “coercion”. Why did you reject an amendment to do just that?

22. The Second Reading margin was a narrow one (55%-45%). You handpicked your committee so that most votes went your way 65%-35%, and the witnesses were 80%-20% balanced towards supporters. Why did you need to control the process so much?

23. A coalition of eating disorders charities backed five separate amendments to the bill. Why did you reject all of them?

24. Prof Mark Taubert says those receiving assisted suicide drugs have a “substantial risk” of “distressing deaths”, and the anaesthiogist Dr Joel Zivot of Emory University claims: “Assisted suicide is not painless or peaceful or dignified. In fact, in the majority of cases, it is a very painful death.” Why did you reject amendments to ensure that the drugs must be approved by the MHRA; that the Health Secretary must conclude they do not cause pain; and that applicants must be told about potential complications?

25. You rejected amendments allowing family to know about and contribute to the process. Is it correct to say that the first a family might know of a loved one’s assisted suicide application is when they are asked to come and pick up the body?

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@FPLMate GW23:
1️⃣ Jaros —› Verbruggen, Jackson —› Gakpo
2️⃣ Salah
3️⃣ 🚫

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@NVIDIAGeForce #geforcertx50

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@ss_korol @kepano 'Paste from Markdown' exists in Google Docs: Tools > Preferences > Enable Markdown in Docs

[Jon Pike @runthinkwrite]

Preliminary (but long) thread on the charge in the Williams et al @AdamRutherford letter that mandatory sex screening is a "Coercive Offer"
In our reply we make the quick point that, if this was true, other enforcement of eligibility rules would also be coercive offers.

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@grunthos War is grim and horrific, but the civilian casualty numbers in Gaza appear comparatively low for modern urban warfare. It would help if the authorities actually reported them, of course.

[Andrew Fox @Mr_Andrew_Fox]

This article shreds to pieces the atrocity denialism pushed by propaganda outlets like the Grayzone, Mondoweiss, The Electronic Intifada and others.

Outside Israel, we have too quickly forgotten the true extent of the horrors of 7th October. I’ve tried six times here and I just don’t have the words for the sheer monstrosity of what this document describes. John Ware has done an incredible job collating and detailing it in a dispassionate, factual, evidenced manner. This should be a multiple award-winning piece.

If you ever need facts and evidence to rebut denial of the atrocities, rape (the report is distressingly detailed on this) and massacre of 7th October, read this and bookmark it.

If you want to understand the reasons for IDF operations in Gaza and why Hamas must be deleted to the greatest extent possible, read this.

If you want to know the horrors that thousands of Hamas militia and Palestinian civilians perpetrated, and the depths of their murdering, rapist black souls, read this.

It is a remarkable, brave and searing piece of the very finest journalism.

Read this.

https://t.co/3cLqoUxt5w

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

This, from British Athletics, seems to contradict England's recent 'science in sport'-win of penalty-takers' 'protectors'. 2 steps forward, etc...

[Cathy Devine @cathydevine56]

It is of great concern that @BritAthletics has become a member of Inclusive Employers.
@IncEmp promotes a contested unevidenced belief in gender identity ideology which asymmetrically benefits males with transgender identities at the expense of females. 1/
https://t.co/V50O5H3WtW

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

This seems to contradict England's recent 'science in sport'-win of penalty-takers' 'protectors'. 2 steps forward, etc...

[Cathy Devine @cathydevine56]

It is of great concern that @BritAthletics has become a member of Inclusive Employers.
@IncEmp promotes a contested unevidenced belief in gender identity ideology which asymmetrically benefits males with transgender identities at the expense of females. 1/
https://t.co/V50O5H3WtW

[Andrew Rugman @therug]

@JuggleOddballs @__jacker__ Former customer, here. No further custom.