Inverted

And I'm fairly sure it's been debunked as a reliable test by the WHO. What a country.

The real gut puncher for me is that in hindsight we could have voted Yes, and even by the pessimistic forecasts we would be not have been any worse off than this whole debacle has made us. And at least we would be going forward with a government that has at least a passing interest in advancing the interests of the population.

First case in Scotland now apparently. Our lack of interest in ski trips could only save us for so long.

Epidemic seems pretty much unavoidable in Germany. More UK cases confirmed thanks to aforementioned poshos on their skiing trips. Expecting something akin to this on my way into work tomorrow.

Parasite - 9/10 Just a brilliant movie. It really just is good on every level. It's gripping all the time at through, it's funny and hits you hard, it keeps you guessing, and I've been juggling different questions about it in my head ever since I left the cinema. Looks great as well, it's brilliantly acted, and the music is equal parts hilarious and disturbing.

I seem to get hit hard by anything I catch. Spent a solid month shitting, vomiting and drifting in and out of sleep.

Not to be a dickhead but I'm quite relieved my age group's death rate is 0.2%. I thought it was a lot more dangerous. I think my odds were roughly the same back when I got swine flu. It was still a horrid time, though.

I think the thing I love most about Firmino is that at a time when every elite forward is either monstrously fast, or built like a brick shithouse, he is one of the best few CFs in the world without any serious natural athleticism.

More of a Wijnaldum myself. Goes under the radar for really nailing the basics, but pulls something special out the bag once in a while.

It would be hugely satisfying to see Barcelona enter some serious wilderness years once Messi is gone.

It's also bizarre when people see "it can't be legal for UEFA to tell a club that it can't use its own assets". As though, if it ever got to a real court, FFP would instantly be destroyed. That's just people trying to sound legalistic without any knowledge of real world regulation. Freedom of contract and property isn't absolute. Competition law exists, and it allows you do all sorts of things in the interests of market competition and consumer welfare. You can make all sorts of demands on companies. You can nullifyhuge contracts and partnerships, you can force companies to raise or lower prices.You can deny companies the right to merge - you can even command a company to break off a division as a separate company if you feel it threatens competitive balance. You can command Google not to prioritise its own pages on its own search engine - that's how specific it can get. A private club of companies, which is what UEFA essentially is, asking its members to maintain a certain degree of financial stability is nothing in comparison.

The damning thing seems to be that it should be so easy to disprove. UEFA have an email saying "this Etihad deal is funded partly by Etihad, and partly by the UAE state conglomerate that owns us". Surely City just need to show that this email was incorrect? They seem to be focusing on the fact that the emails were obtained illegally, but this isn't a criminal trial with strict evidential rules. The substance of these emails are some pretty stark revelations that, if untrue, should be easy to show up as such.

Seems to be some confusion over the exact reason - I've not read the transcripts but it seems they're being penalised for obstructing UEFA's investigation and not specifically for their spending? Kinda undermines the argument about FFP being a racket or whatever. So far, UEFA have been fine with financial doping, so long as you at least conceal it with a bit of discretion and don't take them for fools.

One thing the Tories have shown with complete clarity and shamelessness in government has been a complete disregard for the law. The posts of attorney general and lord chancellor have become complete jokes under their rule, on top of the judicial system being routinely demonised, and constitutional conventions being ignored. Wouldnt be surprised to see us in a Poland or Hungary kind of situation before this government's term is up.

Yeah I liked him in Good Time. It's just the difference between where he is in his career, and where Willem Defoe is, just shows so much when theyre put next to each other for a full movie. I think Pattinson could really have a special career if he keeps this up.

In the last week I've seen Uncut Gems 8/10 The Lighthouse 8.5/10 Adam Sandler and Willem Dafoe absolutely hit it out the park in 2019. Some of most amazing performances I can remember. Robert Pattinson also did brilliantly in The Lighthouse, it's a kind of mixed blessing for a less experienced actor, being in a movie where basically the only other cast member is Willem Dafoe. He's just a different level. A24 is really getting me more excited to see movies than I've been in years.

I'm still quite adamant that things will get much, much worse before any progress is ever made. As a nation our pride is much too swollen and skulls too thick to learn our lesson this easily. But the feeling that for the next while, there's no possibility of anything changing, it's quite relaxing. It's like the Alcoholics Anonymous prayer - you hope for the strength to change the things you can, and the serenity to accept what you can't.

Been struggling the last couple of months with a German translation of The Picture of Dorian Gray. Finally got through it last week. Since then I've started this

I'm actually quite shocked they've admitted it.

Having an opinion on whether assassinating Soleimani is a good idea is entirely separate from any consideration of his moral standing as a person. Kim Jong-Un is a bad guy, I'd even say Xi Jinping is a pretty bad guy - think it's a good idea to kill either of them?

It may fundamentally be the same old great power politics, but even in a proxy conflict there are unwritten rules and expectations. This is in at least that sense something new, an escalation. During the Cold War, it's not like the USA went out to assassinate Red Army commanders.

It seems the Iraqi parliament has resolved on kicking out the Americans. So their stunt has cost them what little influence they had left in the country, though they probably figured they were on borrowed time anyway so it's not a huge loss to have the Iraqi gov turn completely on them now.

There's not going to be a nuclear war or even a major conventional war. The Iranian regime may be run by zealots, but they're not insane - in fact if either side can be accused of a religiously fanatical, apocalyptic worldview, it's the Americans. Any major conflict would result in hundreds of thousands of not millions of deaths, and they would overwhelmingly be Middle-Eastern. The Americans would be overjoyed with that result. The Iranians, not so much. The Iranians will have to respond somehow to save face, but they'll do so in a way which does not play directly into the Americans' hands. The Americans are throwing their weight around and needling their enemies into gestures of resistance, which they can then frame as aggression.

I'm pretty sure that the US once wargamed a war with Iran scenario and it was a catastrophe, with thousands of American dead and a carrier lost in the first two days. The United States is untouchable militarily but for decades they have understandably been cautious with powers such as Iran and North Korea which possess large, extremely motivated militaries with strong asymmetric warfare capabilities. Nobody is going to do a Saddam anymore and march a ripoff 1980s Soviet Army into a 21st century head to head with the US.

So the United States has assassinated Qassem Soleimani, one of Iran's most senior commanders, in Baghdad. Killing a military leader of your rival, with whom you are not officially at war, while he's in a neutral third country. There is no standard by which this isn't an outright act of war. American bloodlust knows no bounds.