On this police incident, have people not learned that you can't trust what you see? Its very easy to manipulate photos and even video so that the context is changed.
We saw it last week with the Leeds riot when there was a hard right pile on to the Green councillor. His politics aren't my cup of tea, but he was clearly trying to *stop* rioters despite all the "evidence" posted of him rioting.
Carefully frame the image. Clip down to one specific part which you can then put into any context you like for audiences who are utterly biased and seek validation and confirmation bias.
So here we are. Poor man being brutalised by the police. Look at the evidence! And then a day late the police being brutalised by the man. Look at the evidence! At no point do we get fed the entire video of the entire incident, because that doesn't serve an agenda.
Again, you can't believe what you see. It might not be factual, actual.
AIUI, RCS or TSE outlined it a while back: bans are almost-always just for a temporary period in the sin bin, so one can return with even greater vigour.
On this police incident, have people not learned that you can't trust what you see? Its very easy to manipulate photos and even video so that the context is changed.
We saw it last week with the Leeds riot when there was a hard right pile on to the Green councillor. His politics aren't my cup of tea, but he was clearly trying to *stop* rioters despite all the "evidence" posted of him rioting.
Carefully frame the image. Clip down to one specific part which you can then put into any context you like for audiences who are utterly biased and seek validation and confirmation bias.
So here we are. Poor man being brutalised by the police. Look at the evidence! And then a day late the police being brutalised by the man. Look at the evidence! At no point do we get fed the entire video of the entire incident, because that doesn't serve an agenda.
Again, you can't believe what you see. It might not be factual, actual.
Indeed. That pile onto the Green chap was also seen on here. So it ill behoves PB to go all pearl-clutching about the latest video one way or another, yet again.
With the 'police brutality' story, I saw that Anderson and Tice are on the case backing the police officer involved. Even if you don't agree with them it is surely good that you can have politicians that say what a lot of people think. That is how democracy is supposed to be.
Of course it's good that you can have it, but having it is another thing altogether.
...
Backing the police officer is fine.
But both of them going in feet first, before we knew any more than the first video where the policemen kicked his head in, is very concerning.
It should have been "we need to know all the information before making any judgement, and the people attacking the police need to STFU."
We 'knew' that three police officers were injured, including a policewoman who suffered a broken nose. That indicates there was a story well before that first video, and that the first video did not show the full story. In fact, it might even have been trimmed to only show one side.
Of course, if you are an ex-'journalist' now MP, you say that the police 'say' that the police were injured, whilst talking the other side as gospel...
I'd say it probably was trimmed; all we had as far as I could see was a police officer kicking the head and stamping on a man who was under control.
It concerns me that two MPs engaged in heaping strong praise on that policeman at that point. At that point it was a dog whistle, imo.
And it also concerns me that other MPs seem to have jumped to the defence of the guy on the ground, when the facts were not fully known.
Again, it's worth crediting Burnham for his remarkable.refusal to jump to conclusions.
Indeed.
For the first time ever, I'll say Burnham did the right thing there.
"Greater Manchester's Mayor Andy Burnham called for people to wait until they had the full context of the incident before judging those involved.
In response to Mr Burnham's comments, the family's representative said there was "no context justifying an assault when someone is on the ground"."
With the 'police brutality' story, I saw that Anderson and Tice are on the case backing the police officer involved. Even if you don't agree with them it is surely good that you can have politicians that say what a lot of people think. That is how democracy is supposed to be.
Of course it's good that you can have it, but having it is another thing altogether.
...
Backing the police officer is fine.
But both of them going in feet first, before we knew any more than the first video where the policemen kicked his head in, is very concerning.
It should have been "we need to know all the information before making any judgement, and the people attacking the police need to STFU."
We 'knew' that three police officers were injured, including a policewoman who suffered a broken nose. That indicates there was a story well before that first video, and that the first video did not show the full story. In fact, it might even have been trimmed to only show one side.
Of course, if you are an ex-'journalist' now MP, you say that the police 'say' that the police were injured, whilst talking the other side as gospel...
I'd say it probably was trimmed; all we had as far as I could see was a police officer kicking the head and stamping on a man who was under control.
It concerns me that two MPs engaged in heaping strong praise on that policeman at that point. At that point it was a dog whistle, imo.
And it also concerns me that other MPs seem to have jumped to the defence of the guy on the ground, when the facts were not fully known.
A great many people on Twitter, and especially many MPs, should remember Horatio Hornblower's favourite philosopher:
'Oft have I regretted speaking, but yet am I to regret silence.'
Well yebbut twix is a conversation and conversations without words are unrewarding.
Presumably we are allowed to say we were ok with TM Crooks's fate?
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
I was one of those arguing against Leon and Blanche's view of the police behaviour but I think it is well out of order to ban them for holding a view some of us might disagree with. And the excuse about 'cross-hairs' is just that. An excuse. They were not advocating political assassination. They were making a statement about how armed police react. I disagree with them completely as I said in reply to Blanche but it takes a pretty convoluted thought process to equate that with political assassination.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
AIUI, RCS or TSE outlined it a while back: bans are almost-always just for a temporary period in the sin bin, so one can return with even greater vigour.
It does seem a bit odd that *this* was the offence though. I suspect (cause it's mine and I'm perfectly reasonable) the median position on this is that police guy probably shouldn't have done the second kick but at the end of he's only human and the crim guy had it coming, so their extant posts seem fine with that. But probably there be deleted posts or something.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
Eeeh 'tis all aboot t'brass, lad
You can like it or not, but this government is going to de facto reintegrate us into Europe silently and very, very fast. Not celebrating this, I am just predicting it
On this police incident, have people not learned that you can't trust what you see? Its very easy to manipulate photos and even video so that the context is changed.
We saw it last week with the Leeds riot when there was a hard right pile on to the Green councillor. His politics aren't my cup of tea, but he was clearly trying to *stop* rioters despite all the "evidence" posted of him rioting.
Carefully frame the image. Clip down to one specific part which you can then put into any context you like for audiences who are utterly biased and seek validation and confirmation bias.
So here we are. Poor man being brutalised by the police. Look at the evidence! And then a day late the police being brutalised by the man. Look at the evidence! At no point do we get fed the entire video of the entire incident, because that doesn't serve an agenda.
Again, you can't believe what you see. It might not be factual, actual.
Worse than that. No single video, perhaps no collection of videos, can tell the whole story. In part because not all thoughts and motivations are visible.
Just as an aside. I have had long discussions with two close friends over the past couple of weeks. I noticed that they don't join in with the 'condemnations' of the 'far right' in social discussions. I subsequently found that we have similar views; ie voting for centre left parties, but somewhat ambivalent and even sympathetic to Reform/Trump. The problem that we are all aggrieved about is the limits on discourse and speech imposed by the left over the last decade or so. There is a sense that there needs to be a force that has to blow open a load of inherent existential problems with the current direction of travel, the top of the list of problems and most obvious flashpoint being political bias in the civil service. I doubt that we are in any way significant politically, but I do have a sense that there are quite a few posters on this website that may be in a similar place.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
Eeeh 'tis all aboot t'brass, lad
You can like it or not, but this government is going to de facto reintegrate us into Europe silently and very, very fast. Not celebrating this, I am just predicting it
And to a very large extent, that's the Wish of the People, as shown by several years of polling.
I suspect including the "we don't want another massive public debate about it, just get on with it" aspect.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
Nothing to stop us allowing imports of US cars (the other major world standard). Though it might not help us - they are in some ways stricter.
Bad stricter: US mandated backup cameras on all models from (from memory) 2018. Made cheap cars more expensive.
Good stricter: US mandates rear lights cannot be on a moveable piece - so if you raise the boot lid whilst stopped on the highway the lights stay pointing backwards to warn oncoming traffic - no such law in europe.
I was one of those arguing against Leon and Blanche's view of the police behaviour but I think it is well out of order to ban them for holding a view some of us might disagree with. And the excuse about 'cross-hairs' is just that. An excuse. They were not advocating political assassination. They were making a statement about how armed police react. I disagree with them completely as I said in reply to Blanche but it takes a pretty convoluted thought process to equate that with political assassination.
This was a serious error by the mods.
TSE is the editor - and to me it is totally understandable right now to apply temporary cooling to chat about the advocacy of violence.
Banning Leon and Blanche for (I think?) sympathising with the policeman in this instance seems a bit harsh. I can well see you might disagree with their (and my) position on this, but I don't think they were saying the unsayable. It's not as if they went the full Rod Crosby.
It wasn’t (in their case) sympathy with the policeman it was frustration that a violent muslim didn't get shot dead. It came over to me as boorish and boring. And probably racist. But each to his own. That's just my reaction and I'm not especially pleased to see a ban. Banning brings undeserved attention to this sort of shit. Ignoring would be my choice. They both contribute good stuff as well.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Missed all the excitement. Don't agree with Leon and Blanche's take. As someone in education, I'd expect to be marched off the property and banned from all schools had I done similar. Regardless of how many colleagues have been hurt. And, believe me, I've seen some very dear mates hurt, and been hurt myself. We've been to A+E multiple times. However. I don't want them banned. I don't really want anyone banned. However annoying they are.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
Dishonest? We discussed this before. Your figures depend on the UK GDP having fallen further than the EU due to COVID lockdowns. Therefore during the one year of 2021 UK had to correct further than the EU to get back to where it was before. And on the basis of that one year you have concocted the nonsense that the UK has outperformed the EU even though it has fairly consistently grown slower in the other years since then and also since the Referendum.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Some asshat was ranting on Twix earlier that cans are still marked in ml, not pints.
@PippaCrerar But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Some asshat was ranting on Twix earlier that cans are still marked in ml, not pints.
Yes
So they can sell them in their largest markets.
Fuckwits...
Not sure UK-brewed-under-license lager is your best example here... most markets would expect 330ml or 500ml or 660ml not the 568ml shown in that twitter post.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Some asshat was ranting on Twix earlier that cans are still marked in ml, not pints.
Yes
So they can sell them in their largest markets.
Fuckwits...
I have been partying in Brest and Douarnenez where my default drink has been une pinte de cider, served in a pint glass with a mark on the side at the 50cl level (but the pint is topped up to the actual pint level). It takes very little to overcome these issues with a bit of good will.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
That one we can opt out of, though. Or, at least we can avoid mandating it. Manufacturers can choose not to provide the option, and we can choose not to buy.
On this police incident, have people not learned that you can't trust what you see? Its very easy to manipulate photos and even video so that the context is changed.
We saw it last week with the Leeds riot when there was a hard right pile on to the Green councillor. His politics aren't my cup of tea, but he was clearly trying to *stop* rioters despite all the "evidence" posted of him rioting.
Carefully frame the image. Clip down to one specific part which you can then put into any context you like for audiences who are utterly biased and seek validation and confirmation bias.
So here we are. Poor man being brutalised by the police. Look at the evidence! And then a day late the police being brutalised by the man. Look at the evidence! At no point do we get fed the entire video of the entire incident, because that doesn't serve an agenda.
Again, you can't believe what you see. It might not be factual, actual.
Good evening
From the onset Andy Burham warned everyone including the media not to jump to conclusions as he had seen this video and also commented that there were two other serious incidents one on the plane and another in baggage claim and the authorities are seeking video evidence of them as well
Andy Burham is the only one in my opinion coming out of this with credibility and good on him
Let's all wait for the independent report before rushing to judgment
Banning Leon and Blanche for (I think?) sympathising with the policeman in this instance seems a bit harsh. I can well see you might disagree with their (and my) position on this, but I don't think they were saying the unsayable. It's not as if they went the full Rod Crosby.
See my post at 7.04pm.
The armed police are armed for a reason - that is, they are on high alert for terrorists. If we agree we have armed police, surely we agree there should be circumstances in whch they should shoot people dead? You might reasonably argue that this does not meet that threshold. But I don't think it unreasonable to consider that it might.
The police have no more legal right to use force than you or I. They have a dispensation to carry weapons.
Armed police are present in the airports, all the time, by the way. Not just for alerts.
But when they use their weapons (or other force), it must meet measures of proportionality and justification.
Kicking someone on the ground, in the head, might be justified. If say, they were about to stab someone.
In this case, the person on the ground wasn’t posing a further threat.
Seriously, just checked back in and seen Leon and Blanche banned. I honestly couldn’t see anything super offensive. We are a robust intelligent bunch of people (excluding myself of course)who frankly need to be challenged and hear crap we don’t agree with.
My favourite don at school always made it clear that if you can’t listen to things you don’t agree with then your own view is worth nothing. He did however stand as Lib Dem Mp for Winchester many times and never got elected but, he was a fine man, wrong party at the time.
This site thrives on all the views. I didn’t see anything racist, overly nasty, and frankly we tolerate some pretty potentially sexist stuff here.
Let everyone counter arguments and not block people. We have no other travel writers, postmen. They are a loss for a bit of a Sunday pissy rant.
@PippaCrerar But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
Mm. Is that a signal she feels she's in the wrong Party?
Any chance of the winner getting George Russell'd?
They've made a joke of a pool. It's not actually to regulations.
That's weird, my dad just said he thought the pool looked quite shallow. Have the French done this on the cheap?
The pool is 2.2 metres deep. Normally the pool would be 3 metres deep, but they are not doing the aqua ballet dancing synchronised swimming in this pool, so it doesn't need to be. The deeper the pool, the faster they swim (fewer waves bouncing back up off the bottom of the pool).
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
Nothing to stop us allowing imports of US cars (the other major world standard). Though it might not help us - they are in some ways stricter.
Bad stricter: US mandated backup cameras on all models from (from memory) 2018. Made cheap cars more expensive.
Good stricter: US mandates rear lights cannot be on a moveable piece - so if you raise the boot lid whilst stopped on the highway the lights stay pointing backwards to warn oncoming traffic - no such law in europe.
Backup meaning reversing camera? They rock and are essential esp when the standard vehicle is an F150. As for cost that is car manufacturers taking the piss. You can get an equivalent aftermarket kit for sub £100 on Amazon. Or £9.78 on temu.
@PippaCrerar But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
Finally it dawns - off to Reform if they will have her
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Some asshat was ranting on Twix earlier that cans are still marked in ml, not pints.
Yes
So they can sell them in their largest markets.
Fuckwits...
Or, as Number Two put it at the end of the first Austin Powers movie,
But you, like an idiot, want to take over the world. And you don't realize there is no world anymore! It's only corporations!
The urge to Take Back Control is a very understandable one. That means starting by working out where the control is.
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
@PippaCrerar But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
Mm. Is that a signal she feels she's in the wrong Party?
Perhaps Suella Braverman should hook up (politically) with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
Dishonest? We discussed this before. Your figures depend on the UK GDP having fallen further than the EU due to COVID lockdowns. Therefore during the one year of 2021 UK had to correct further than the EU to get back to where it was before. And on the basis of that one year you have concocted the nonsense that the UK has outperformed the EU even though it has fairly consistently grown slower in the other years since then and also since the Referendum.
World Bank GDP per head PP. Top line is UK; bottom line EU
A curious date to choose. Does that mean she's written off the next election?
It means that, if she were to lose in May 2028, she has an excuse not to resign. And by December 2030, it's awfully close to a possible May 2032 election, so no time for a novice...
Seriously, just checked back in and seen Leon and Blanche banned. I honestly couldn’t see anything super offensive. We are a robust intelligent bunch of people (excluding myself of course)who frankly need to be challenged and hear crap we don’t agree with.
My favourite don at school always made it clear that if you can’t listen to things you don’t agree with then your own view is worth nothing. He did however stand as Lib Dem Mp for Winchester many times and never got elected but, he was a fine man, wrong party at the time.
This site thrives on all the views. I didn’t see anything racist, overly nasty, and frankly we tolerate some pretty potentially sexist stuff here.
Let everyone counter arguments and not block people. We have no other travel writers, postmen. They are a loss for a bit of a Sunday pissy rant.
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
In all fairness a "fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country" was recently done over several weeks. Tories bad (not Labour good) was the judgement of the people. Is she saying we are wrong?
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
Dishonest? We discussed this before. Your figures depend on the UK GDP having fallen further than the EU due to COVID lockdowns. Therefore during the one year of 2021 UK had to correct further than the EU to get back to where it was before. And on the basis of that one year you have concocted the nonsense that the UK has outperformed the EU even though it has fairly consistently grown slower in the other years since then and also since the Referendum.
World Bank GDP per head PP. Top line is UK; bottom line EU
The amount of wank the BBC pundits spout post-Peaty whilst the swimming continues in the background...thank goodness for Eurosport.
Paid for Discovery this time round. I know the BBC is limited to only 2 streams but looking through they seem to have
1. Missed Peaty's swim live judging by the rewind on iPlayer compared to when it was on on Eurosport due to Murray coverage, I mean they have two streams surely you put the tennis on one and swimming on the other ? 2. Missed a whole bunch of swimming they could have shown due to copious amounts of inane waffle regarding Peaty
Any chance of the winner getting George Russell'd?
They've made a joke of a pool. It's not actually to regulations.
That's weird, my dad just said he thought the pool looked quite shallow. Have the French done this on the cheap?
The pool is 2.2 metres deep. Normally the pool would be 3 metres deep, but they are not doing the aqua ballet dancing synchronised swimming in this pool, so it doesn't need to be. The deeper the pool, the faster they swim (fewer waves bouncing back up off the bottom of the pool).
2.2 metres is really poor. I don't know much about swimming pools but it seems to me that in the UK the newer it is:
a) the shallower it is b) the colder it is (ignoring unheated lidos etc)
Am I imagining this?
I massively prefer a 3m deep pool for sure. And I am not an athlete. I've even forgotten how to do the backstroke right.
@PippaCrerar But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
Is "diagnosis and prescription" referring to Braverman's political views OR her psychological condition?
With respect to the Goldwater Rule, yours truly is NOT a doctor!
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
Dishonest? We discussed this before. Your figures depend on the UK GDP having fallen further than the EU due to COVID lockdowns. Therefore during the one year of 2021 UK had to correct further than the EU to get back to where it was before. And on the basis of that one year you have concocted the nonsense that the UK has outperformed the EU even though it has fairly consistently grown slower in the other years since then and also since the Referendum.
World Bank GDP per head PP. Top line is UK; bottom line EU
So the Olympic flame under the balloon. is electric, with carefully-lit water mist which isn’t hot. So it’s not burning fossil fuel but green electricity. A very effective piece of innovation by EDF.
Seriously, just checked back in and seen Leon and Blanche banned. I honestly couldn’t see anything super offensive. We are a robust intelligent bunch of people (excluding myself of course)who frankly need to be challenged and hear crap we don’t agree with.
My favourite don at school always made it clear that if you can’t listen to things you don’t agree with then your own view is worth nothing. He did however stand as Lib Dem Mp for Winchester many times and never got elected but, he was a fine man, wrong party at the time.
This site thrives on all the views. I didn’t see anything racist, overly nasty, and frankly we tolerate some pretty potentially sexist stuff here.
Let everyone counter arguments and not block people. We have no other travel writers, postmen. They are a loss for a bit of a Sunday pissy rant.
No, wishing death on people is not acceptable.
Don’t be soft. I bet you have hoped trump dies. Trés Stupid as usual.
A curious date to choose. Does that mean she's written off the next election?
It means that, if she were to lose in May 2028, she has an excuse not to resign. And by December 2030, it's awfully close to a possible May 2032 election, so no time for a novice...
Partly that. But as a logical computer scientist (which is why I her so much) I think what she's effectively saying is she'll win the next election. Unless it's held super early.
@PippaCrerar But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
Mm. Is that a signal she feels she's in the wrong Party?
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
Dishonest? We discussed this before. Your figures depend on the UK GDP having fallen further than the EU due to COVID lockdowns. Therefore during the one year of 2021 UK had to correct further than the EU to get back to where it was before. And on the basis of that one year you have concocted the nonsense that the UK has outperformed the EU even though it has fairly consistently grown slower in the other years since then and also since the Referendum.
World Bank GDP per head PP. Top line is UK; bottom line EU
But the EU includes many former Soviet states
So before all this started, the British line is considerably higher than the EU average line, and now it's only a little bit higher?
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
Fine! And the manufacturers can then choose to opt out of bothering to sell us cars which are globally non-standard.
Was it like this in the 1970s when they forced people to wear a seatbelt?
The amount of wank the BBC pundits spout post-Peaty whilst the swimming continues in the background...thank goodness for Eurosport.
Paid for Discovery this time round. I know the BBC is limited to only 2 streams but looking through they seem to have
1. Missed Peaty's swim live judging by the rewind on iPlayer compared to when it was on on Eurosport due to Murray coverage, I mean they have two streams surely you put the tennis on one and swimming on the other ? 2. Missed a whole bunch of swimming they could have shown due to copious amounts of inane waffle regarding Peaty
Iplayer can't even seamlessly move between "wimbledon on bbc 1" and "wimbledon on bbc 2" when you choose a stream for a given match and the channel changes halfway through. You have to re-find the game stream in the list and hope they updated it, or stream the channels directly, and change them yourself.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
On, what, the nine hand-carved Morgans we manufacture for the home market per year?
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
It's just the sheer dishonesty of it all. They are trying to embed a narrative that our economy is falling behind the EU. When the actual reverse has happened.
Dishonest? We discussed this before. Your figures depend on the UK GDP having fallen further than the EU due to COVID lockdowns. Therefore during the one year of 2021 UK had to correct further than the EU to get back to where it was before. And on the basis of that one year you have concocted the nonsense that the UK has outperformed the EU even though it has fairly consistently grown slower in the other years since then and also since the Referendum.
World Bank GDP per head PP. Top line is UK; bottom line EU
The UK and EU implemented Brexit at the end of 2020, when it was no longer held back by EU structures. You are also artificially inflating the EU as their population drops.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
Fine! And the manufacturers can then choose to opt out of bothering to sell us cars which are globally non-standard.
Was it like this in the 1970s when they forced people to wear a seatbelt?
AI enforced swerving and accelerator pedals that don't work don't strike me as particularly safe.
I'll hang on to my old car without these 'safety' features, thank you very much.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
On, what, the nine hand-carved Morgans we manufacture for the home market per year?
Nope, for example in exchange for the US dropping its 10% import tariffs on British cars. They could the sell us cars without having to produce european versions.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Some asshat was ranting on Twix earlier that cans are still marked in ml, not pints.
Yes
So they can sell them in their largest markets.
Fuckwits...
Or, as Number Two put it at the end of the first Austin Powers movie,
But you, like an idiot, want to take over the world. And you don't realize there is no world anymore! It's only corporations!
The urge to Take Back Control is a very understandable one. That means starting by working out where the control is.
Fifty years ago the Left used to fantasise about storming 'the commanding heights' of the economy.
That would have been coal mining, steel making and ship building.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
On, what, the nine hand-carved Morgans we manufacture for the home market per year?
All of the features I've complained about are software. The ability to disable them permanently should be as easy as flicking a switch.
Seriously, just checked back in and seen Leon and Blanche banned. I honestly couldn’t see anything super offensive. We are a robust intelligent bunch of people (excluding myself of course)who frankly need to be challenged and hear crap we don’t agree with.
My favourite don at school always made it clear that if you can’t listen to things you don’t agree with then your own view is worth nothing. He did however stand as Lib Dem Mp for Winchester many times and never got elected but, he was a fine man, wrong party at the time.
This site thrives on all the views. I didn’t see anything racist, overly nasty, and frankly we tolerate some pretty potentially sexist stuff here.
Let everyone counter arguments and not block people. We have no other travel writers, postmen. They are a loss for a bit of a Sunday pissy rant.
No, wishing death on people is not acceptable.
Don’t be soft. I bet you have hoped trump dies. Trés Stupid as usual.
that site thriving on all views idealism didn't last long did it?
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
Fine! And the manufacturers can then choose to opt out of bothering to sell us cars which are globally non-standard.
Was it like this in the 1970s when they forced people to wear a seatbelt?
AI enforced swerving and accelerator pedals that don't work don't strike me as particularly safe.
I'll hang on to my old car without these 'safety' features, thank you very much.
The radar braking system in mine is so oversensitive it's like owning a skittish horse that wants to freak out at the slightest incident sometimes. I feel like I have to tell it to calm down, I can see the car/corner ahead of me that it's panicking over...
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
"‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values."
No they don't. That is why you were totally rat-fucked at the GE.
They don't want unfunded tax cuts, pointless psycho-drama over who is this week's leader and endless culture war crap. They want public services that function and some kind of hope their kids will have a house and their grandkids wont live in a scorched 40 degree wasteland.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
On, what, the nine hand-carved Morgans we manufacture for the home market per year?
All of the features I've complained about are software. The ability to disable them permanently should be as easy as flicking a switch.
TBF we need to get rid of the national speed limit. There's not really much point in the current "nod and wink" approach. We need to be explicit that 200mph+ is absolutely fine on a motorway in the right conditions.
Otherwise may as well have these ridiculous restrictions. We either believe in the laws or we don't.
Sadly half of Westminster either doesn't have a driving licence or doesn't drive in practice, and the rest of it mostly is around the south east where those conditions barely ever arise. Nearest bit of motorway to London I can think of where they regularly arise is Huntingdon-Peterborough section of the A1.
They've no idea how much harm they're doing with this crazy 70mph thing.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I rarely find the Daily Mail interesting, but there was an interesting article on their site today, about buying a new car that has EU mandated safety features in it.
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
What EU-mandated safety features? You mean the UNECE? That's the UN - those are GLOBAL standards.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
Again, what EU safety features? The EU does not set the rules. It could choose to copy Murica and disapply the UNECE global rules. But it does not. And neither do we.
And we can choose to opt out of them, and should.
Fine! And the manufacturers can then choose to opt out of bothering to sell us cars which are globally non-standard.
Was it like this in the 1970s when they forced people to wear a seatbelt?
To be pedantic, seatbelts in the front became law in 1983, and in the back in 1991.
Trans ideology ! She really is delusional if she thinks people gave a fig about that when voting . Good riddance to her , when will she be joining Reform ?
Seriously, just checked back in and seen Leon and Blanche banned. I honestly couldn’t see anything super offensive. We are a robust intelligent bunch of people (excluding myself of course)who frankly need to be challenged and hear crap we don’t agree with.
My favourite don at school always made it clear that if you can’t listen to things you don’t agree with then your own view is worth nothing. He did however stand as Lib Dem Mp for Winchester many times and never got elected but, he was a fine man, wrong party at the time.
This site thrives on all the views. I didn’t see anything racist, overly nasty, and frankly we tolerate some pretty potentially sexist stuff here.
Let everyone counter arguments and not block people. We have no other travel writers, postmen. They are a loss for a bit of a Sunday pissy rant.
No, wishing death on people is not acceptable.
Don’t be soft. I bet you have hoped trump dies. Trés Stupid as usual.
that site thriving on all views idealism didn't last long did it?
That’s the point - you and I can be rude to each other but no need for a ban. I would welcome you calling me a cnt or whatever.
Trans ideology ! She really is delusional if she thinks people gave a fig about that when voting . Good riddance to her , when will she be joining Reform ?
On the way out to public oblivion she slags off the membership of the party?
My popcorn is on standby when Farage says 'non' to her membership application.
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
"‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values."
No they don't. That is why you were totally rat-fucked at the GE.
They don't want unfunded tax cuts, pointless psycho-drama over who is this week's leader and endless culture war crap. They want public services that function and some kind of hope their kids will have a house and their grandkids wont live in a scorched 40 degree wasteland.
Trans ideology ! She really is delusional if she thinks people gave a fig about that when voting . Good riddance to her , when will she be joining Reform ?
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
Banning Leon and Blanche for (I think?) sympathising with the policeman in this instance seems a bit harsh. I can well see you might disagree with their (and my) position on this, but I don't think they were saying the unsayable. It's not as if they went the full Rod Crosby.
See my post at 7.04pm.
The armed police are armed for a reason - that is, they are on high alert for terrorists. If we agree we have armed police, surely we agree there should be circumstances in whch they should shoot people dead? You might reasonably argue that this does not meet that threshold. But I don't think it unreasonable to consider that it might.
The police have no more legal right to use force than you or I. They have a dispensation to carry weapons.
Armed police are present in the airports, all the time, by the way. Not just for alerts.
But when they use their weapons (or other force), it must meet measures of proportionality and justification.
Kicking someone on the ground, in the head, might be justified. If say, they were about to stab someone.
In this case, the person on the ground wasn’t posing a further threat.
Yes, yes, but the conversation was about 'is it reasonable to suggest that the perp should have been shot'? My view is not that the perp should have been shot, for assaulting the police, but my point is that it is not unreasonable to hold such a view, given that we arm police and had it been America the perp would by now by lying in the morgue. My point is that Leon and Blanche's view wasn't so unreasonable as to warrant a banning.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
I see the eurofanatics are using (frequently wrong) IMF projections to make a fresh push on rejoining the EU without a mandate.
Entirely ignoring the fact that the UK has OUTGROWN the EU since we left EU structures.
Why bother? We could beat the EU and G7 on GDP and GDP per capita and they'd never concede the point - they'd just do the puppydog eyes and start banging on about how the real tragedy is the cultural effects.
Eeeh 'tis all aboot t'brass, lad
You can like it or not, but this government is going to de facto reintegrate us into Europe silently and very, very fast. Not celebrating this, I am just predicting it
And to a very large extent, that's the Wish of the People, as shown by several years of polling.
I suspect including the "we don't want another massive public debate about it, just get on with it" aspect.
On the other hand, this Government of all the fuckups could end up poisoning the well of European reintegration for the next 50 years. It's quite cheering when looked at that way. It's right that the fag end of the Blairite consensus should be owned by the party of Blair.
With respect to PB ban hammer, perhaps worth keeping in mind, that PB monitors-hammerers are mindful of need to guard against potential accusations of libel.
Do NOT know IF that played any part in most recent ban-hammerings.
"Donald Trump has told voters that Kamala Harris is being presented as a “Margaret Thatcher” figure as he attacked the “sick” new Democratic nominee in a fiery speech...“Three months ago she was thought of so badly, [the media] were just killing her,” he said of the vice-president.
“And now they’re trying to make her into a – let’s say – Margaret Thatcher. I don’t think so. It’s not going to happen.
Comments
We saw it last week with the Leeds riot when there was a hard right pile on to the Green councillor. His politics aren't my cup of tea, but he was clearly trying to *stop* rioters despite all the "evidence" posted of him rioting.
Carefully frame the image. Clip down to one specific part which you can then put into any context you like for audiences who are utterly biased and seek validation and confirmation bias.
So here we are. Poor man being brutalised by the police. Look at the evidence! And then a day late the police being brutalised by the man. Look at the evidence! At no point do we get fed the entire video of the entire incident, because that doesn't serve an agenda.
Again, you can't believe what you see. It might not be factual, actual.
For the first time ever, I'll say Burnham did the right thing there.
"Greater Manchester's Mayor Andy Burnham called for people to wait until they had the full context of the incident before judging those involved.
In response to Mr Burnham's comments, the family's representative said there was "no context justifying an assault when someone is on the ground"."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp38e4r2rz5o
Presumably we are allowed to say we were ok with TM Crooks's fate?
1. The safety features are bonkers and clearly liable to failure, beeping randomly causing a hazard at best, rumbling steering wheels, 'ai' based auto swerving when it thinks youre out of your lane, slowing you down when sometimes you need to speed up to get out of trouble, etc.
2. Leaving the EU has made absolutely no difference to our ability to opt out of this pointless shit, manufacturers are still putting this unwelcome shit into cars sold in the UK as 'we only make them for one market' (well, how come the steering wheel is on the other side then?)
3. Pointless and nannying rules like the above on car 'safety' are precisely the sort of thing that annoyed me about the EU (see also the pointless DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT COOKIES????!!! notice on every site now). But if even actually leaving the EU doesn't exempt you from them, then it does make you wonder what is the point. Perhaps the UK government could pass a law banning these dangerous 'safety' features from our cars.
This was a serious error by the mods.
You can like it or not, but this government is going to de facto reintegrate us into Europe silently and very, very fast. Not celebrating this, I am just predicting it
As that 1980s TV ad for the Guardian showed.
https://youtu.be/_SsccRkLLzU
I suspect including the "we don't want another massive public debate about it, just get on with it" aspect.
Bad stricter: US mandated backup cameras on all models from (from memory) 2018. Made cheap cars more expensive.
Good stricter: US mandates rear lights cannot be on a moveable piece - so if you raise the boot lid whilst stopped on the highway the lights stay pointing backwards to warn oncoming traffic - no such law in europe.
As for UK-specific rules, we can try and set whatever rules we like. Manufacturers can either make their products compliant or not sell in our market. Whether they do or not depends on how much they can be bothered putting out with out petulant pointless shit differentials.
Remember UKCA? Already dead and replaced with CE. Why? Because it was petulant pointless shit differential which added nothing other than cost and complexity.
What the actual is wrong with Brexiteer Tories? They HATE red tape. Unless its red tape they want to tie Britain up in to make petulant pointless shit differentials from the hated EU.
Narcissism of small differences etc.
(Probably says more about the reliability of the concept of relative poverty, but there we are.)
Don't agree with Leon and Blanche's take. As someone in education, I'd expect to be marched off the property and banned from all schools had I done similar.
Regardless of how many colleagues have been hurt. And, believe me, I've seen some very dear mates hurt, and been hurt myself. We've been to A+E multiple times.
However. I don't want them banned. I don't really want anyone banned. However annoying they are.
Yes
So they can sell them in their largest markets.
Fuckwits...
NEW: Kemi Badenoch enters Tory leadership race with pledge to get the party back into government by 2030.
https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/1817657225307111665
BREAKING: Suella Braverman has announced she will not be standing to be the next Conservative leader
But Suella Braverman announces she’ll withdraw from contest because there’s no point in her running to lead the Tory party “when most of the MPs disagree with my diagnosis and prescription”.
I personally would never buy a car that a) beeps at me when I'm doing 21 in a 20 zone (massive distraction) b) swerves when it thinks i'm 'out of lane' (ai tech is far too fallible) or c) limits my speed (I avoided a serious and possibly life threatening accident once by speeding up to avoid the danger).
Serious question, are you actually liable in an accident if the accident is caused by your car's 'safety' features?
From the onset Andy Burham warned everyone including the media not to jump to conclusions as he had seen this video and also commented that there were two other serious incidents one on the plane and another in baggage claim and the authorities are seeking video evidence of them as well
Andy Burham is the only one in my opinion coming out of this with credibility and good on him
Let's all wait for the independent report before rushing to judgment
Armed police are present in the airports, all the time, by the way. Not just for alerts.
But when they use their weapons (or other force), it must meet measures of proportionality and justification.
Kicking someone on the ground, in the head, might be justified. If say, they were about to stab someone.
In this case, the person on the ground wasn’t posing a further threat.
Is that a signal she feels she's in the wrong Party?
But you, like an idiot, want to take over the world. And you don't realize there is no world anymore! It's only corporations!
The urge to Take Back Control is a very understandable one. That means starting by working out where the control is.
https://x.com/robfordmancs/status/1817655248745619879
BBC News.
Exclusive:
Kemi Badenoch enters the Tory leadership race and warns colleagues that things ‘could get much worse’ as she calls for fundamental renewal of Tory values
‘There is a bigger question of what it means to be a Conservative today
‘If there wasn’t, the Reform party would not exist. It is not enough to call for ‘unity to win’. We need to ask ourselves, ‘What are we uniting around? What are we winning for?’
‘The 2019 election won us a majority to get Brexit done. That 80-seat majority disappeared after Brexit as disagreements emerged over lockdown policy, house building, state spending and more
‘I believe that the majority of British people share our values. We cannot let them down again by exiting the political arena for a decade or more, handing the initiative to a Labour party that has no fundamental analysis of what is going wrong in the country or in the world beyond Orwellian chants of ‘Labour good, Tories bad’.’
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1817660367813661083
Tories bad (not Labour good) was the judgement of the people.
Is she saying we are wrong?
1. Missed Peaty's swim live judging by the rewind on iPlayer compared to when it was on on Eurosport due to Murray coverage, I mean they have two streams surely you put the tennis on one and swimming on the other ?
2. Missed a whole bunch of swimming they could have shown due to copious amounts of inane waffle regarding Peaty
a) the shallower it is
b) the colder it is (ignoring unheated lidos etc)
Am I imagining this?
I massively prefer a 3m deep pool for sure. And I am not an athlete. I've even forgotten how to do the backstroke right.
With respect to the Goldwater Rule, yours truly is NOT a doctor!
https://x.com/brutofficiel/status/1817126878701920560
Our failures on migration, taxes and trans ideology cost us at the election but my fellow party members refuse to face up to them
SUELLA BRAVERMAN"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/28/suella-braverman-no-point-leading-conservative-party/
Ouch.
Was it like this in the 1970s when they forced people to wear a seatbelt?
I'll hang on to my old car without these 'safety' features, thank you very much.
Not likely under Trump, though.
That would have been coal mining, steel making and ship building.
No they don't. That is why you were totally rat-fucked at the GE.
They don't want unfunded tax cuts, pointless psycho-drama over who is this week's leader and endless culture war crap. They want public services that function and some kind of hope their kids will have a house and their grandkids wont live in a scorched 40 degree wasteland.
@Samfr
·
22m
She didn't "pull out" - she didn't have enough MP votes to get in in the first place.
Otherwise may as well have these ridiculous restrictions. We either believe in the laws or we don't.
Sadly half of Westminster either doesn't have a driving licence or doesn't drive in practice, and the rest of it mostly is around the south east where those conditions barely ever arise. Nearest bit of motorway to London I can think of where they regularly arise is Huntingdon-Peterborough section of the A1.
They've no idea how much harm they're doing with this crazy 70mph thing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp38e4r2rz5o
As predicted, back to the TikyTok.
Strange timing.
My popcorn is on standby when Farage says 'non' to her membership application.
I think she understands that.
Do NOT know IF that played any part in most recent ban-hammerings.
“And now they’re trying to make her into a – let’s say – Margaret Thatcher. I don’t think so. It’s not going to happen.
“Margaret Thatcher didn’t laugh like that. Did she? If she did, she wouldn’t have been Margaret Thatcher,” the Republican added, labelling his rival “Laughin’ Kamala Harris”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/07/28/trump-rally-sick-kamala-harris-is-no-margaret-thatcher/