Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Smoking is dumb, and anyone who does it is dumb.
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Smoking is dumb, and anyone who does it is dumb.
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Smoking is dumb, and anyone who does it is dumb.
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Prohibition is illiberal and does not work.
If I were in charge, I would exile all smokers to Rwanda Gaza.
Starmer clearly does not enthuse voters as much as Blair but does not turn them off as much as Corbyn did either.
Note only Cameron, Brown and Blair are seeing as better PMs than Starmer would be relative to how Starmer does against Sunak.
Over a quarter of voters think Starmer would be a worse PM than Cameron too and nearly a third worse than Blair
When running from a bear, you don't have to be fast, merely faster than someone else. People are worried about the possibility of another 5 years of the current shambles. They don't need to be enthusiastic about Starmer to vote Labour rather than the Tories.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
This is NOT an AI post, this is an actual politics and betting post, relating to tech
Check this fake video, made from one single virtual photo of a non existent human, and a three second clip of audio. Now from that Microsoft can make almost completely convincing fake video, saying whatever words they want her to say
The next elections are going to be flooded with this tech, with deepfakes, with scenes of politicians saying shit they didn't say, or stuff they should have said, or Putin saying he sexually loves Ed Davey, and it will be entirely convincing (because, even if you can just spot the odd tiny glitch in this video, the tech is only going to get better and better)
The first vid of the blonde woman is particularly WOW
My takeaway from this, for politics and betting is that the side with the most credulous voters will gain. One suspects that is Trump voters in the USA
Renovation work appears to be when old structures are at their greatest danger. Notre Dame, Cutty Sark…when the Great Fire of London broke out, one of the things that did for the vast stone edifice of Old St Paul’s was the wooden scaffolding covering it. A century of neglect since the Reformation, Civil War etc (and a lightning strike that took down the steeple) had left it in a dangerous condition.
Many moons ago, I was involved with the demo of a small (about ten foot long, one carriageway wide) bridge over a culvert. We spent a hot summer's afternoon cutting off the safety railings and other items, ready for it to be lifted out. The bridge sat on baulk timbers, about a foot square, that ran along the top of the abutments. When we came back the next morning, one of the timbers had burnt right through for about half of its length, and was still gently smouldering away. There had been no sign of any smoke or fire the previous evening, and we had quenched the areas we had been cutting with water.
Sparks get into weird places.
It was a good job the bridge had to be removed, as it would have been very costly otherwise...
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Smoking is dumb, and anyone who does it is dumb.
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Prohibition is illiberal and does not work.
It's not being made illegal.
Isn't that the policy? That it will be made illegal for any adults under an age.
That's prohibition. And a pretty stupid form of prohibition.
Starmer clearly does not enthuse voters as much as Blair but does not turn them off as much as Corbyn did either.
Note only Cameron, Brown and Blair are seeing as better PMs than Starmer would be relative to how Starmer does against Sunak.
Over a quarter of voters think Starmer would be a worse PM than Cameron too and nearly a third worse than Blair
When running from a bear, you don't have to be fast, merely faster than someone else. People are worried about the possibility of another 5 years of the current shambles. They don't need to be enthusiastic about Starmer to vote Labour rather than the Tories.
For now yes, one he likely gets to No 10 though voters will expect results from him to vote for him again, rather than against the Tories. Unless they pick say Braverman as leader in Opposition
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
I agree with your first sentence. I would be cautious about expecting any sense from today's Republican Party, even in the face of Trump's defeat (again). Everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Democrat victory in the House and Senate too.
This is NOT an AI post, this is an actual politics and betting post, relating to tech
Check this fake video, made from one single virtual photo of a non existent human, and a three second clip of audio. Now from that Microsoft can make almost completely convincing fake video, saying whatever words they want her to say
The next elections are going to be flooded with this tech, with deepfakes, with scenes of politicians saying shit they didn't say, or stuff they should have said, or Putin saying he sexually loves Ed Davey, and it will be entirely convincing (because, even if you can just spot the odd tiny glitch in this video, the tech is only going to get better and better)
The first vid of the blonde woman is particularly WOW
My takeaway from this, for politics and betting is that the side with the most credulous voters will gain. One suspects that is Trump voters in the USA
And less developed countries.
Speaking of which, India goes to the polls starting today, in several phases ending in early June.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
But hope the House continues kowtowing to Netanyahu?
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
I agree with your first sentence. I would be cautious about expecting any sense from today's Republican Party, even in the face of Trump's defeat (again). Everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Democrat victory in the House and Senate too.
Tomorrow's vote will be interesting. Has Speaker Johnson actually changed his mind on Ukraine, or are there some traps in the legislation he's proposed? Certainly his words in the last few days suggest the former.
I reckon he's been shown some worrying intelligence. Or the latest cheque from Russia bounced.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
With a bit of luck and a following wind the Dems will win the Presidency and both Houses.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
What people can afford and what they try to afford are of course not necessarily aligned.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Smoking is dumb, and anyone who does it is dumb.
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Prohibition is illiberal and does not work.
It's not being made illegal.
Isn't that the policy? That it will be made illegal for any adults under an age.
That's prohibition. And a pretty stupid form of prohibition.
Sunak's policy will, eventually, in 80+ years, make it illegal to sell cigarettes to anyone in the UK, although possession won't be illegal. I can't see anything banning someone from growing their own tobacco.
A minority of LibDem MPs voted for this in the Commons recently. None voted against.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
The logical thing would be to ban inhaled combustion products. That's where the major risks to the lungs come from. It would leave vapes, heat-not-burn tobacco, snuff..., and cannabis taken in non-combustion forms as legal.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Quite a high rate of cannabis induced psychosis though, often paranoia symptoms too.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
The logical thing would be to ban inhaled combustion products. That's where the major risks to the lungs come from. It would leave vapes, heat-not-burn tobacco, snuff..., and cannabis taken in non-combustion forms as legal.
Or the logical thing to do is end prohibition, which does not work, not intoduce any new prohibition, educate people and let educated adults make their own choices.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
You're right. Some do 40, but 10 is more typical. This doesn't change the thrust of the argument.
Smoking kills because you smoke thousands, tens of thousands, of the things.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Even in my smoking days, over 60 years ago, I rarely smoked more than 10 per day.
Cybercriminals threaten to leak all 5 million records from stolen database of high-risk individuals ... The World-Check database used by businesses to verify the trustworthiness of users has fallen into the hands of cybercriminals. ... The World-Check database aggregates information on undesirables such as terrorists, money launderers, dodgy politicians, and the like. It's used by companies during Know Your Customer (KYC) checks, especially by banks and other financial institutions to verify their clients are who they claim to be. https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/19/cybercriminals_threaten_to_leak_all/
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
Smoking is dumb, and anyone who does it is dumb.
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Prohibition is illiberal and does not work.
It's not being made illegal.
Isn't that the policy? That it will be made illegal for any adults under an age.
That's prohibition. And a pretty stupid form of prohibition.
No that's not the policy. It will be difficult for people born after 2009 to ever obtain cigarettes but should they manage it they will commit no crime by smoking them.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Yes. Most heavy smokers go the "rollie" route, I'd have thought, to keep the cost down.
If this is the case, it could be the difference between doing it in public and doing it in private.
No business of anybody else if it is done in private and only consenting adults are involved. Definitely not children present. And maids should be given due protection.
If this is the case, it could be the difference between doing it in public and doing it in private.
No business of anybody else if it is done in private and only consenting adults are involved. Definitely not children present. And maids should be given due protection.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Yes. Most heavy smokers go the "rollie" route, I'd have thought, to keep the cost down.
My grandad used to smoke roll ups. He even had a little machine to do the rolling. Not a hint of a wokerati filter mind.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
That is absolutely effing appalling. I can't believe I'd ever see anything like that in this country.
Enough. This has to stop - and whatever you think about what's happening in Gaza (which has no relevance to the question) - it is time we all came together to oppose this upsurge in antisemitism in our own country.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
I agree with your first sentence. I would be cautious about expecting any sense from today's Republican Party, even in the face of Trump's defeat (again). Everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Democrat victory in the House and Senate too.
Tomorrow's vote will be interesting. Has Speaker Johnson actually changed his mind on Ukraine, or are there some traps in the legislation he's proposed? Certainly his words in the last few days suggest the former.
I reckon he's been shown some worrying intelligence. Or the latest cheque from Russia bounced.
They’ve come round to the realisation, as I thought they would eventually, that more than $40bn of the $50bn in aid to Ukraine they’re voting on, is actually aid to the Military Industrial Complex, and will be spent in the United States in a whole load of Rubuplican districts with businesses that are large Republican donors.
I’m on record as saying that all a change of administration will bring about is a change in language, and that most of the military operation will continue as-is.
There’s probably only a dozen Congresscritters on each side, that are actually against supporting Ukraine in principle.
Donald Trump fell asleep in court at his hush money trial, Maggie Haberman reports.
This is the third time #SleepyDon has fallen asleep in court this week.
I'm not expecting a guilty verdict on this (and I'd rather it wasn't the first of his trials) but it's a genuine punishment, isn't it, him having to go in and sit there every day for weeks. Hopefully it's adding to his general stress levels and making a meltdown more likely.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
Just think how bad things would be if Germany was only matching the UK in military aid.
Tesla is recalling all 3,878 Cybertrucks that it has shipped to date, due to a problem where the accelerator pedal can get stuck, putting drivers at risk of a crash
I was thinking about getting a Cybertruck.
I have the Rivian R1T. It's truly great: fantastic mileage, super refined, able to haul lots of shit.
Should they ever come to the UK, and should you not live in a city, I would highly recommend.
With a 149 kWh battery pack you could use one to temporarily restore power to communities cut off the grid during storms.
I have to say I don't see the point. It's best left in the States.
It's 18+ ft long, needs an 8ft gap to get 3 inches of space each side, and has a load bay barely longer than the boot of an estate car which is only 1.5 feet high when secured.
Anybody who thinks they need a nearly 3 tonne vehicle that can hurl itself from 0-60 in 3 seconds at a likely cost of £60k to £80k to drive around UK countryside roads needs their head examining - imo.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Yes. Most heavy smokers go the "rollie" route, I'd have thought, to keep the cost down.
My grandad used to smoke roll ups. He even had a little machine to do the rolling. Not a hint of a wokerati filter mind.
I've had phases of them in my (long) smoking career too. Can be a satisfying ritual. And MUCH cheaper. Downsides are your fingers go yellow and you get tobacco caught in your teeth. You never saw that with Humphrey Bogart or Lauren Bacall, did you.
An allegation has been made re: Brown. He was subject to a Labour Party investigation that he didn't believe was fair, so he left the party Brown is suggesting the Party is wrong for investigating him and too slowly. You should be pleased they took the time to investigate.
The argument about Menzies, and Pincher (not sure about Wragg) was the Party were made aware of allegations and rather than investigating, buried them.
There are wrong 'uns all over the place. I don't believe you can blame the Conservative Party for Menzies alleged behaviour. You can blame them for sitting on it for three months however.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
I agree with your first sentence. I would be cautious about expecting any sense from today's Republican Party, even in the face of Trump's defeat (again). Everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Democrat victory in the House and Senate too.
Tomorrow's vote will be interesting. Has Speaker Johnson actually changed his mind on Ukraine, or are there some traps in the legislation he's proposed? Certainly his words in the last few days suggest the former.
I reckon he's been shown some worrying intelligence. Or the latest cheque from Russia bounced.
They’ve come round to the realisation, as I thought they would eventually, that more than $40bn of the $50bn in aid to Ukraine they’re voting on, is actually aid to the Military Industrial Complex, and will be spent in the United States in a whole load of Rubuplican districts with businesses that are large Republican donors.
I’m on record as saying that all a change of administration will bring about is a change in language, and that most of the military operation will continue as-is.
There’s probably only a dozen Congresscritters on each side, that are actually against supporting Ukraine in principle.
Trump will do whatever is best for Trump. The GOP will follow his command.
In the meantime, the GOP's immoral delays have cost Ukraine 40-50square km of territory, a large number of lives, and vast disruption.
You cannot be MAGA/GOP and pro-Ukraine. The two are mutually exclusive.
Donald Trump fell asleep in court at his hush money trial, Maggie Haberman reports.
This is the third time #SleepyDon has fallen asleep in court this week.
He could do an Ernest Saunders.
He's the fittest and most awake defendant in any trial ever, truly beautifully fit and awake, and he can bring medical and psychological evidence to prove it. Only fake news in the fake media says otherwise.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
"Why isn’t Europe giving more money to help Ukraine? Why is it that the United States is over $100 Billion Dollars into the Ukraine War more than Europe, and we have an Ocean between us as separation! Why can’t Europe equalize or match the money put in by the United States of America in order to help a Country in desperate need? As everyone agrees, Ukrainian Survival and Strength should be much more important to Europe than to us, but it is also important to us! GET MOVING EUROPE! In addition, I am the only one who speaks for “ME” and, while it is a total mess caused by Crooked Joe Biden and the Incompetent Democrats, if I were President, this War would have never started!"
This is NOT an AI post, this is an actual politics and betting post, relating to tech
Check this fake video, made from one single virtual photo of a non existent human, and a three second clip of audio. Now from that Microsoft can make almost completely convincing fake video, saying whatever words they want her to say
The next elections are going to be flooded with this tech, with deepfakes, with scenes of politicians saying shit they didn't say, or stuff they should have said, or Putin saying he sexually loves Ed Davey, and it will be entirely convincing (because, even if you can just spot the odd tiny glitch in this video, the tech is only going to get better and better)
The first vid of the blonde woman is particularly WOW
My takeaway from this, for politics and betting is that the side with the most credulous voters will gain. One suspects that is Trump voters in the USA
And less developed countries.
I am genuinely unsure that politics can continue, as we know it, in the context of this technology
Full credit to Labour for it (whatever it is) not leaking. Either that , or the press has the details and is sitting on them until the weekend before polling day.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Yes. Most heavy smokers go the "rollie" route, I'd have thought, to keep the cost down.
My grandad used to smoke roll ups. He even had a little machine to do the rolling. Not a hint of a wokerati filter mind.
I've had phases of them in my (long) smoking career too. Can be a satisfying ritual. And MUCH cheaper. Downsides are your fingers go yellow and you get tobacco caught in your teeth. You never saw that with Humphrey Bogart or Lauren Bacall, did you.
Yes, my Grandad had yellow fingers and he died of cancer and heart disease, granted in his eighties and he'd been a career miner. I don't suppose the jeopardy of smoking is quite the same when one spent their days for forty years breathing in coal dust.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
From Leon's post: "... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
Yes, everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Biden victory in November.
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
I agree with your first sentence. I would be cautious about expecting any sense from today's Republican Party, even in the face of Trump's defeat (again). Everyone who wants a Ukraine victory in the war should want a Democrat victory in the House and Senate too.
Tomorrow's vote will be interesting. Has Speaker Johnson actually changed his mind on Ukraine, or are there some traps in the legislation he's proposed? Certainly his words in the last few days suggest the former.
I reckon he's been shown some worrying intelligence. Or the latest cheque from Russia bounced.
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
Just think how bad things would be if Germany was only matching the UK in military aid.
Denmark, with their population of under 6m, is the really interesting outlier there.
Donald Trump fell asleep in court at his hush money trial, Maggie Haberman reports.
This is the third time #SleepyDon has fallen asleep in court this week.
He could do an Ernest Saunders.
He's the fittest and most awake defendant in any trial ever, truly beautifully fit and awake, and he can bring medical and psychological evidence to prove it. Only fake news in the fake media says otherwise.
I think he quite possibly may end up doing an Ernest Saunders when he finally pinned, though I don't think he would get Mar-a-Lago past them as a home for the criminally insane.
I would lay odds that some version of that is a page in the last 10% of the playbook.
Quite a good question. I suppose the difference is that tobacco smoking is more harmful than cannabis, although I would have thought there wasn’t a lot of difference which burning vegetable smoke was inhaled. I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
The damage from the smoke of a spliff is about the same as the damage from the smoke of a cigarette. However, nicotine is exceedingly addictive, so smokers typically smoke 40 a day. Regular cannabis users get through far, far fewer roll-ups. Thus, safer. Not that this is necessarily the answer to the question posed.
Smokers typically smoke 40 a day? Evidence? I don't think so - only a small minority of chain smokers. 40 a day of normal fags would cost c. £210 a week, which is way beyond what many/most smokers can afford.
Yes. Most heavy smokers go the "rollie" route, I'd have thought, to keep the cost down.
My grandad used to smoke roll ups. He even had a little machine to do the rolling. Not a hint of a wokerati filter mind.
I've had phases of them in my (long) smoking career too. Can be a satisfying ritual. And MUCH cheaper. Downsides are your fingers go yellow and you get tobacco caught in your teeth. You never saw that with Humphrey Bogart or Lauren Bacall, did you.
Yes, my Grandad had yellow fingers and he died of cancer and heart disease, granted in his eighties and he'd been a career miner. I don't suppose the jeopardy of smoking is quite the same when one spent their days for forty years breathing in coal dust.
I knew an ex-miner (grass-worker) who smoked roll-ups. If he was not smoking, his fingers would be moving against each other, as if rolling up an non-existent cigarette. An affectation.
The EU makes an apparently generous offer. A form of limited free movement for young people. Ok maybe the details need examining - but why not return the favour with some warm words? “This could potentially be very interesting. We need to see the small print but we want a good close relationship, repair the ill will of Brexit, blah blah”
Instead BOTH parties dismiss it out of hand. “Fuck off”
Apart from anything else it’s so utterly graceless and charmless. Starmer is going to be a disaster
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
That is absolutely effing appalling. I can't believe I'd ever see anything like that in this country.
Enough. This has to stop - and whatever you think about what's happening in Gaza (which has no relevance to the question) - it is time we all came together to oppose this upsurge in antisemitism in our own country.
No. The dividing line should be accepted to be about Gaza. Here it is:
Goodies: those who support the Palestinians against genocide, which includes many Jews.
Baddies: those who support genocide against the Palestinians, which also includes many Jews.
Jews aren't the issue. The Jewish supremacist regime that's carrying out the genocide is certainly the issue.
You won't like this, @ThomasNashe, but the above way of looking at things directly implies "Don't hassle anyone for being Jewish".
Of the Jews who support the Palestinians and oppose the existence of the supremacist regime, some organise putting their Jewish heritage up front, including some who are religious, some don't. All are welcome. See Neturei Karta for a religious group that, the last I heard, supported the IRM ("Hamas").
Because the current leadership of the party are pandering to looking for the votes of people who don't want to legalise cannabis, and hope the party at large fall in line?
"Why isn’t Europe giving more money to help Ukraine? Why is it that the United States is over $100 Billion Dollars into the Ukraine War more than Europe, and we have an Ocean between us as separation! Why can’t Europe equalize or match the money put in by the United States of America in order to help a Country in desperate need? As everyone agrees, Ukrainian Survival and Strength should be much more important to Europe than to us, but it is also important to us! GET MOVING EUROPE! In addition, I am the only one who speaks for “ME” and, while it is a total mess caused by Crooked Joe Biden and the Incompetent Democrats, if I were President, this War would have never started!"
Sheekey's oysters are £50 + plus wine, a pud and a tip and that's over £100.
For one.
I could never justify that.
(I confess I've had one meal costing an absurd sum at Raffles, SIngapore years ago. I still flinch at the memory - which is a shame as it was when we got engaged.)
Excellent oysters at Sheekeys. Two dozen natives, Irish, and Fines de Claires. With a friend who, it turns out, is dating someone rather famous
He's also ex SAS and has friends out in Ukraine and they say Ukraine is going to lose
**** me, I keep accidentally tuning in to the musings of the love child of William Hickey and Lord Haw Haw.
Well he really is an ex soldier, he has spent months in Ukraine doing security, and he has military colleagues out there right now and they tell him - quite neutrally - that Ukraine is likely to lose, from this point. They reckon that even if the US ammo and artillery arrives, it is probably too late. Putin will attack and bomb Ukraine into suing for a peace that suits Putin. That's what he predicts based on the verdicts of his army buddies presently in Ukraine, and he is better informed than - probably - anyone on this forum (including me)
Certainly the reports coming from Ukraine at the moment are pretty grim. But, if this is consolation, they do somewhat remind me of the downbeat reports coming from Russian units and Wagner when they were running out of ammunition in 2023.
Yes. I should clarify he doesn't think putin is about to seize Kyiv or Odessa. Attack in this war is as hard for the Russians as it is for Ukrainians. This is a war which favours defenders, the technology has evolved that way
He told me that his friend toured the Russian front line during the Ukrainian counter offensive. He said the Russian defences were ten kilometres deep with multiple different trench networks and drones always hovering, and they hds laid so many mines it stretched creduilty: his friend estimated every square metre had three mines, on average. some tiny and impossible to detect. No one can attack across that, and Ukraine should not have tried, they lost so many men in a futile quest
But Russia will find it equally hard the other way. So my pal's prediction is that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce, and Putin will get to keep what he's got. For now
The German refusal to provide Taurus, along with the MAGA hold up in the US, really doing Putin's work for him. I do wonder though, if the new realism from some NATO members, partic the Nordics and Czechs, plus Johnson finally steering through the US package might change things. The F16s will eventually arrive too.
Just think how bad things would be if Germany was only matching the UK in military aid.
Denmark, with their population of under 6m, is the really interesting outlier there.
IIRC, a lot of the small eastern European countries have supplied vastly more on a per capita basis, or as percentage of GDP.
And if you take the EU as a whole, it outdoes the USA on a non per-capita basis.
Tesla is recalling all 3,878 Cybertrucks that it has shipped to date, due to a problem where the accelerator pedal can get stuck, putting drivers at risk of a crash
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
That is absolutely effing appalling. I can't believe I'd ever see anything like that in this country.
Enough. This has to stop - and whatever you think about what's happening in Gaza (which has no relevance to the question) - it is time we all came together to oppose this upsurge in antisemitism in our own country.
No. The dividing line should be accepted to be about Gaza. Here it is:
Goodies: those who support the Palestinians against genocide, which includes many Jews.
Baddies: those who support genocide against the Palestinians, which also includes many Jews.
Jews aren't the issue. The Jewish supremacist regime that's carrying out the genocide is certainly the issue.
You won't like this, @ThomasNashe, but the above way of looking at things directly implies "Don't hassle anyone for being Jewish".
Of the Jews who support the Palestinians and oppose the existence of the supremacist regime, some organise putting their Jewish heritage up front, including some who are religious, some don't. All are welcome. See Neturei Karta for a religious group that, the last I heard, supported the IRM ("Hamas").
It's the idea that Israel represents the Jews that is absolute cack.
This is NOT an AI post, this is an actual politics and betting post, relating to tech
Check this fake video, made from one single virtual photo of a non existent human, and a three second clip of audio. Now from that Microsoft can make almost completely convincing fake video, saying whatever words they want her to say
The next elections are going to be flooded with this tech, with deepfakes, with scenes of politicians saying shit they didn't say, or stuff they should have said, or Putin saying he sexually loves Ed Davey, and it will be entirely convincing (because, even if you can just spot the odd tiny glitch in this video, the tech is only going to get better and better)
The first vid of the blonde woman is particularly WOW
My takeaway from this, for politics and betting is that the side with the most credulous voters will gain. One suspects that is Trump voters in the USA
And less developed countries.
I am genuinely unsure that politics can continue, as we know it, in the context of this technology
Won't be up to us to decide anyway, it will be up the dominant AI.
Tesla is recalling all 3,878 Cybertrucks that it has shipped to date, due to a problem where the accelerator pedal can get stuck, putting drivers at risk of a crash
I was thinking about getting a Cybertruck.
Assuming they ever come to Europe. They are *big*
I can't see how they would pass EU pedestrian safety standards, either. I might be wrong though, especially as they've changed the design slightly since the prototype was unveiled.
The EU makes an apparently generous offer. A form of limited free movement for young people. Ok maybe the details need examining - but why not return the favour with some warm words? “This could potentially be very interesting. We need to see the small print but we want a good close relationship, repair the ill will of Brexit, blah blah”
Instead BOTH parties dismiss it out of hand. “Fuck off”
Apart from anything else it’s so utterly graceless and charmless. Starmer is going to be a disaster
Could be me seeing what I want to see but I sense your Labour vote might be going astray?
The EU makes an apparently generous offer. A form of limited free movement for young people. Ok maybe the details need examining - but why not return the favour with some warm words? “This could potentially be very interesting. We need to see the small print but we want a good close relationship, repair the ill will of Brexit, blah blah”
Instead BOTH parties dismiss it out of hand. “Fuck off”
Apart from anything else it’s so utterly graceless and charmless. Starmer is going to be a disaster
Could be me seeing what I want to see but I sense your Labour vote might be going astray?
Every time you say this I become more determined to vote Starmer just to freak you out. He’s gonna win anyway and he’s bound to win in Camden. So if the only fun I can have is perturbing you I might as well
Tesla is recalling all 3,878 Cybertrucks that it has shipped to date, due to a problem where the accelerator pedal can get stuck, putting drivers at risk of a crash
I was thinking about getting a Cybertruck.
Assuming they ever come to Europe. They are *big*
I can't see how they would pass EU pedestrian safety standards, either. I might be wrong though, especially as they've changed the design slightly since the prototype was unveiled.
A vehicle designed to scythe down children, Death Race 2000 style There is a YouTuber grating and chopping carrots on the door edge, it is so sharp. Elon is no Pininfarina.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
That is absolutely effing appalling. I can't believe I'd ever see anything like that in this country.
Enough. This has to stop - and whatever you think about what's happening in Gaza (which has no relevance to the question) - it is time we all came together to oppose this upsurge in antisemitism in our own country.
No. The dividing line should be accepted to be about Gaza. Here it is:
Goodies: those who support the Palestinians against genocide, which includes many Jews.
Baddies: those who support genocide against the Palestinians, which also includes many Jews.
Jews aren't the issue. The Jewish supremacist regime that's carrying out the genocide is certainly the issue.
You won't like this, @ThomasNashe, but the above way of looking at things directly implies "Don't hassle anyone for being Jewish".
Of the Jews who support the Palestinians and oppose the existence of the supremacist regime, some organise putting their Jewish heritage up front, including some who are religious, some don't. All are welcome. See Neturei Karta for a religious group that, the last I heard, supported the IRM ("Hamas").
No genocide is happening.
Israel could have killed a million plus Palestinians by now if they wanted a genocide.
The EU makes an apparently generous offer. A form of limited free movement for young people. Ok maybe the details need examining - but why not return the favour with some warm words? “This could potentially be very interesting. We need to see the small print but we want a good close relationship, repair the ill will of Brexit, blah blah”
Instead BOTH parties dismiss it out of hand. “Fuck off”
Apart from anything else it’s so utterly graceless and charmless. Starmer is going to be a disaster
Sunak missed an epic trolling opportunity. He could have announced engagement on this and said “Thanks to Brexit it we are now able to enter into a special agreement with the EU which allows 18 to 30 year olds from the UK to move freely within the EU to live and work and it allows us to bring in skilled workers in vital services to make Britain great. If we were still in the EU we never would have been able to negotiate this agreement.”
"Why isn’t Europe giving more money to help Ukraine? Why is it that the United States is over $100 Billion Dollars into the Ukraine War more than Europe, and we have an Ocean between us as separation! Why can’t Europe equalize or match the money put in by the United States of America in order to help a Country in desperate need? As everyone agrees, Ukrainian Survival and Strength should be much more important to Europe than to us, but it is also important to us! GET MOVING EUROPE! In addition, I am the only one who speaks for “ME” and, while it is a total mess caused by Crooked Joe Biden and the Incompetent Democrats, if I were President, this War would have never started!"
Your US polling updates are less frequent than they once were. Anything Trump-positive from Trafalgar or Quinnipiac to tickle our fancy?
I'm joking, I don't want to see a Trump-positive poll.
"Crooked Joe Biden" says the defendent facing 3 dozen criminal charges.
Hanging on my wall, is front page from very late-20th century rag "New Federalist" mouth-piece of RFK precursor (sorta) Lyndon LaRouche, with banner headline . . . wait for it . . .
"The Pure Evil of Al Gore"
Effective if NOT necessarily persuasive. However, NOT as memorable as his 1992 POTUS campaign slogan:
"Lyndon LaRouche for President, the Only Opponent George Bush Feared Enough to Put in Prison."
Donald Trump has been deploying same strategy since 2015. But with better (or rather worse) results.
This is NOT an AI post, this is an actual politics and betting post, relating to tech
Check this fake video, made from one single virtual photo of a non existent human, and a three second clip of audio. Now from that Microsoft can make almost completely convincing fake video, saying whatever words they want her to say
The next elections are going to be flooded with this tech, with deepfakes, with scenes of politicians saying shit they didn't say, or stuff they should have said, or Putin saying he sexually loves Ed Davey, and it will be entirely convincing (because, even if you can just spot the odd tiny glitch in this video, the tech is only going to get better and better)
The first vid of the blonde woman is particularly WOW
My takeaway from this, for politics and betting is that the side with the most credulous voters will gain. One suspects that is Trump voters in the USA
And less developed countries.
I am genuinely unsure that politics can continue, as we know it, in the context of this technology
Maybe people will go back to using town hall meetings as their way of choosing which politicians to support.
The paying off bad people - at the police level he should be treated as a potential victim and it is worthy of an initial investigation. Not least for national security reasons. The campaign funds/medical bills - is that electoral commission or commons standards rather than police? I'd have thought so.
Surely there’s some wider context to this piece of footage, and a Met Police sargeant didn’t actually threaten to arrest a man for “being openly Jewish in a public place”?
That is absolutely effing appalling. I can't believe I'd ever see anything like that in this country.
Enough. This has to stop - and whatever you think about what's happening in Gaza (which has no relevance to the question) - it is time we all came together to oppose this upsurge in antisemitism in our own country.
No. The dividing line should be accepted to be about Gaza. Here it is:
Goodies: those who support the Palestinians against genocide, which includes many Jews.
Baddies: those who support genocide against the Palestinians, which also includes many Jews.
Jews aren't the issue. The Jewish supremacist regime that's carrying out the genocide is certainly the issue.
You won't like this, @ThomasNashe, but the above way of looking at things directly implies "Don't hassle anyone for being Jewish".
Of the Jews who support the Palestinians and oppose the existence of the supremacist regime, some organise putting their Jewish heritage up front, including some who are religious, some don't. All are welcome. See Neturei Karta for a religious group that, the last I heard, supported the IRM ("Hamas").
Being Jewish very much is the issue as far as the Met is concerned. The message is if you’re Jewish don’t come into London when there is a demo happening.
Comments
I hope the LibDems sort themselves out policy-wise well before the election! I’m still thinking I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for whoever’s got the best chance of beating the Tory.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68858604
But dumb and as filthy a habit as it might be, it shouldn't be illegal.
Prohibition is illiberal and does not work.
"... that Russia will shell and bomb Ukraine - from a distance - until the Ukrainians seek a truce,"
The problem with that is history has shown that such bombing is not necessarily effective in breaking a nation. Germany's strategic bombing of Britain did not work; neither did ours of them. Vietnam was not defeated by American bombing.
It's possible the turning point will be the US election; If Trump wins, Putin will know he'll have a much greater chance of some form of victory. If Biden wins, I reckon Putin'll be looking for an off-ramp. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Ukrainian aid votes tomorrow as well.
They do not have a duty to ensure that people are arrested for being openly Jewish, which is not yet a crime.
Julius Levinson: "Nobody's perfect!"
And if Biden does win, I hope and expect the House will stop kowtowing to PutinTrump.
Sparks get into weird places.
It was a good job the bridge had to be removed, as it would have been very costly otherwise...
That's prohibition. And a pretty stupid form of prohibition.
I reckon he's been shown some worrying intelligence. Or the latest cheque from Russia bounced.
https://www.libdems.org.uk/press/release/seven-in-ten-car-thefts-not-attended-by-police
A minority of LibDem MPs voted for this in the Commons recently. None voted against.
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S2215-0366(19)30048-3/fulltext
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2014-07-16-how-cannabis-causes-paranoia
Smoking kills because you smoke thousands, tens of thousands, of the things.
...
The World-Check database used by businesses to verify the trustworthiness of users has fallen into the hands of cybercriminals.
...
The World-Check database aggregates information on undesirables such as terrorists, money launderers, dodgy politicians, and the like. It's used by companies during Know Your Customer (KYC) checks, especially by banks and other financial institutions to verify their clients are who they claim to be.
https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/19/cybercriminals_threaten_to_leak_all/
No business of anybody else if it is done in private and only consenting adults are involved. Definitely not children present. And maids should be given due protection.
BREAKING
Donald Trump fell asleep in court at his hush money trial, Maggie Haberman reports.
This is the third time #SleepyDon has fallen asleep in court this week.
Nick Brown, Labours former Chief Whip and MP for Newcastle was suspended from the party and we still haven't been told why!?
Keir Starmer promised a "Transparency Revolution" but so far has covered this up
https://x.com/timmyvoe240886/status/1755222177807290497?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Legally constrained currently. But one day Brown story will shock the public.
thesun.co.uk/news/27409550/…
https://x.com/mrharrycole/status/1781315557410607270?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Enough. This has to stop - and whatever you think about what's happening in Gaza (which has no relevance to the question) - it is time we all came together to oppose this upsurge in antisemitism in our own country.
I’m on record as saying that all a change of administration will bring about is a change in language, and that most of the military operation will continue as-is.
There’s probably only a dozen Congresscritters on each side, that are actually against supporting Ukraine in principle.
It's 18+ ft long, needs an 8ft gap to get 3 inches of space each side, and has a load bay barely longer than the boot of an estate car which is only 1.5 feet high when secured.
Anybody who thinks they need a nearly 3 tonne vehicle that can hurl itself from 0-60 in 3 seconds at a likely cost of £60k to £80k to drive around UK countryside roads needs their head examining - imo.
An allegation has been made re: Brown. He was subject to a Labour Party investigation that he didn't believe was fair, so he left the party Brown is suggesting the Party is wrong for investigating him and too slowly. You should be pleased they took the time to investigate.
The argument about Menzies, and Pincher (not sure about Wragg) was the Party were made aware of allegations and rather than investigating, buried them.
There are wrong 'uns all over the place. I don't believe you can blame the Conservative Party for Menzies alleged behaviour. You can blame them for sitting on it for three months however.
In the meantime, the GOP's immoral delays have cost Ukraine 40-50square km of territory, a large number of lives, and vast disruption.
You cannot be MAGA/GOP and pro-Ukraine. The two are mutually exclusive.
Bond lit his 40th cigarette of the day.
"Why isn’t Europe giving more money to help Ukraine? Why is it that the United States is over $100 Billion Dollars into the Ukraine War more than Europe, and we have an Ocean between us as separation! Why can’t Europe equalize or match the money put in by the United States of America in order to help a Country in desperate need? As everyone agrees, Ukrainian Survival and Strength should be much more important to Europe than to us, but it is also important to us! GET MOVING EUROPE! In addition, I am the only one who speaks for “ME” and, while it is a total mess caused by Crooked Joe Biden and the Incompetent Democrats, if I were President, this War would have never started!"
https://x.com/trumpdailyposts/status/1781031895553445977
Either that , or the press has the details and is sitting on them until the weekend before polling day.
“Sunak rejects offer of mobility scheme for young people between EU and UK
Labour has also rejected European Commission’s proposal which would have allowed young people to live, work or study in the bloc”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/19/sunak-rejects-offer-of-mobility-scheme-for-young-people-between-eu-and-uk
I would lay odds that some version of that is a page in the last 10% of the playbook.
Instead BOTH parties dismiss it out of hand. “Fuck off”
Apart from anything else it’s so utterly graceless and charmless. Starmer is going to be a disaster
Goodies: those who support the Palestinians against genocide, which includes many Jews.
Baddies: those who support genocide against the Palestinians, which also includes many Jews.
Jews aren't the issue. The Jewish supremacist regime that's carrying out the genocide is certainly the issue.
You won't like this, @ThomasNashe, but the above way of looking at things directly implies "Don't hassle anyone for being Jewish".
Of the Jews who support the Palestinians and oppose the existence of the supremacist regime, some organise putting their Jewish heritage up front, including some who are religious, some don't. All are welcome. See Neturei Karta for a religious group that, the last I heard, supported the IRM ("Hamas").
I'm joking, I don't want to see a Trump-positive poll.
"Crooked Joe Biden" says the defendent facing 3 dozen criminal charges.
For one.
I could never justify that.
(I confess I've had one meal costing an absurd sum at Raffles, SIngapore years ago. I still flinch at the memory - which is a shame as it was when we got engaged.)
And if you take the EU as a whole, it outdoes the USA on a non per-capita basis.
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Also, be aware of 'commitments' versus 'deliveries'. The two are not the same.
Israel could have killed a million plus Palestinians by now if they wanted a genocide.
(Yes Aberg, that's a superstar emerging. Great era coming up, I think)
"The Pure Evil of Al Gore"
Effective if NOT necessarily persuasive. However, NOT as memorable as his 1992 POTUS campaign slogan:
"Lyndon LaRouche for President, the Only Opponent George Bush Feared Enough to Put in Prison."
Donald Trump has been deploying same strategy since 2015. But with better (or rather worse) results.
"Lancashire Police have said they are reviewing information about allegations against suspended Tory MP Mark Menzies.
Labour wrote to police on Friday morning calling for an investigation."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68858604
https://www.wsj.com/tech/apple-removes-whatsapp-threads-from-china-app-store-on-government-orders-a0c02100
The campaign funds/medical bills - is that electoral commission or commons standards rather than police? I'd have thought so.