Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
You do love a good pushing from the back post.
"sonny" ... lol
Terrific stuff.
I suppose you dream of the days when people called you sonny.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
You do love a good pushing from the back post.
"sonny" ... lol
Terrific stuff.
I suppose you dream of the days when people called you sonny.
I'm hoping to get one from you someday, Captain.
Don't want Kamski monopolising you.
He doesn't seem to be getting anywhere as is the case for you when you and I converse, so I understand why you would want to ingratiate yourself with him.
Looks extremely close now between Cons and Ref on 307 combined and Lab and LD and SNP on 314 combined.
Though the 4 Greens, 2 Plaid and 2 SDLP and 1 Alliance should secure a second term for Starmer but in a very hung parliament and Cons and Ref would have a clear majority in England
Discussing formal logic with a spam caller makes them soon rethink the call. Good times.
For the have you been in an accident ones I just keep on asking how much will I get. I mean it passes the time.
I have real fun with the car accident ones, I’ll tell them about an accident I was involved in as a driver for about 10 minutes or so then I’ll say ‘I was really drunk and high on cocaine at the time of the accident, can I still get this compensation?’
Looks extremely close now between Cons and Ref on 307 combined and Lab and LD and SNP on 314 combined.
Though the 4 Greens, 2 Plaid and 2 SDLP and 1 Alliance should secure a second term for Starmer but in a very hung parliament and Cons and Ref would have a clear majority in England
Yes, this is a terribly exciting election campaign - too close to call. Not long to go now. I think it all depends on who is most successful at getting out their vote on the day.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
Discussing formal logic with a spam caller makes them soon rethink the call. Good times.
For the have you been in an accident ones I just keep on asking how much will I get. I mean it passes the time.
I have real fun with the car accident ones, I’ll tell them about an accident I was involved in as a driver for about 10 minutes or so then I’ll say ‘I was really drunk and high on cocaine at the time of the accident, can I still get this compensation?’
It's best when they become irritated with you. Which they do far too often for their own business model, given that they are the ones doing the scamming.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
You're not handling this very well are you. In fact it reads like it's affecting you. I always said there should be an "open door" policy at PB where morons like you are welcomed but you really have me doubting my inclusiveness here.
Lying shit it is then.
I've always said pompous gits should be tolerated if they occasionally say something that isn't utterly moronic, but I don't think you ever have.
What a funny old sausage you are.
I have made rationale, cogent, intelligent, insightful, but above all frankly incontrovertible points about USAID which you seem to have been singularly (no, Nigel also) unable to grasp. I am tempted to put this down solely to your immense stupidity but I think, rather, that it contradicts your "truth" and hence you get all snarky. I mean yes, you are immensely stupid, that everyone can see, but to get hung up on the nature of USAID when there is an enormous amount of analysis supporting my position is, well, bizarre.
So looking forward to your next scathing "lying shit" post.
Go for it.
Give me a quote from me that illustrates this then.
Or even find a single person who has mentioned "American cultural imperialism" except you.
Also, are you defending the cutting off of USAID?
Oh FFS. I can't even remember what you are trying to prove I haven't proven.
My point was and is that people bemoan USAID curtailing its activities. But USAID is a tool of the US government designed to promote its soft power (or to undertake cultural imperialism, or expand the US hegemony, take your pick of phrases).
The same people - you perhaps, if you could string together a coherent post about it - who bemoan US imperialist pretensions at the same time are upset that one of the main tools of US imperialism - USAID - is being scaled back.
Now, readers, I'm sorry if I appear to be repeating myself, but it has become evident that The Kamskmeister requires it.
So you still haven't actually found any examples of what you call absolutely bat shit crazy posts.
Nevertheless, I don't see any problems with someone being critical of some parts of US foreign policy while at the same time believing that USAID might do some good. Or even thinking the whole of USAID should be wound down, while being critical of the way it's being done. Or of believing that American influence in the world is on balance a good thing, and thinking that cutting USAID is bad because it reduces that influence (especially if done in a stupid way), as well as hurting people currently being helped.
You don't take any position on what the Trump administration is doing with USAID. I don't think I've known you ever take any position on anything, or offer any policy alternatives on any subject. You seem only to be interested in criticising other people for things they haven't actually said, and imagining that you are cleverer than everyone else. Yes it's pretty annoying, and - top tip - it actually makes you look quite stupid. I don't normally bother because life's too short and I don't think you have anything valuable to offer. This exchange has confirmed it. I suggest we go back to ignoring each other.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
You're not handling this very well are you. In fact it reads like it's affecting you. I always said there should be an "open door" policy at PB where morons like you are welcomed but you really have me doubting my inclusiveness here.
Lying shit it is then.
I've always said pompous gits should be tolerated if they occasionally say something that isn't utterly moronic, but I don't think you ever have.
What a funny old sausage you are.
I have made rationale, cogent, intelligent, insightful, but above all frankly incontrovertible points about USAID which you seem to have been singularly (no, Nigel also) unable to grasp. I am tempted to put this down solely to your immense stupidity but I think, rather, that it contradicts your "truth" and hence you get all snarky. I mean yes, you are immensely stupid, that everyone can see, but to get hung up on the nature of USAID when there is an enormous amount of analysis supporting my position is, well, bizarre.
So looking forward to your next scathing "lying shit" post.
Go for it.
Give me a quote from me that illustrates this then.
Or even find a single person who has mentioned "American cultural imperialism" except you.
Also, are you defending the cutting off of USAID?
Oh FFS. I can't even remember what you are trying to prove I haven't proven.
My point was and is that people bemoan USAID curtailing its activities. But USAID is a tool of the US government designed to promote its soft power (or to undertake cultural imperialism, or expand the US hegemony, take your pick of phrases).
The same people - you perhaps, if you could string together a coherent post about it - who bemoan US imperialist pretensions at the same time are upset that one of the main tools of US imperialism - USAID - is being scaled back.
Now, readers, I'm sorry if I appear to be repeating myself, but it has become evident that The Kamskmeister requires it.
So you still haven't actually found any examples of what you call absolutely bat shit crazy posts.
Nevertheless, I don't see any problems with someone being critical of some parts of US foreign policy while at the same time believing that USAID might do some good. Or even thinking the whole of USAID should be wound down, while being critical of the way it's being done. Or of believing that American influence in the world is on balance a good thing, and thinking that cutting USAID is bad because it reduces that influence (especially if done in a stupid way), as well as hurting people currently being helped.
You don't take any position on what the Trump administration is doing with USAID. I don't think I've known you ever take any position on anything, or offer any policy alternatives on any subject. You seem only to be interested in criticising other people for things they haven't actually said, and imagining that you are cleverer than everyone else. Yes it's pretty annoying, and - top tip - it actually makes you look quite stupid. I don't normally bother because life's too short and I don't think you have anything valuable to offer. This exchange has confirmed it. I suggest we go back to ignoring each other.
LOL.
Statement 1: "I don't think I've known you ever take any position on anything...You seem only to be interested in...and imagining you...and you...and you..."
Statement 2: "I suggest we go back [my emphasis] to ignoring each other."
If that is ignoring god help anyone you lavish attention upon.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
Both are modern spy dramas. Killing more people than the annual murder rate for the whole UK, pre episode is standard. As is no apparent societal effects from piles of corpses.
Discussing formal logic with a spam caller makes them soon rethink the call. Good times.
For the have you been in an accident ones I just keep on asking how much will I get. I mean it passes the time.
I have real fun with the car accident ones, I’ll tell them about an accident I was involved in as a driver for about 10 minutes or so then I’ll say ‘I was really drunk and high on cocaine at the time of the accident, can I still get this compensation?’
It's best when they become irritated with you. Which they do far too often for their own business model, given that they are the ones doing the scamming.
One of them actually swore at me for wasting his time.
I did also have fun with the guy who called me from ‘Windows security department’ and I wasted him time talking about getting a new bay window.
Only doing what their southern Irish cousins are to US goods in response to Trump's likely tariffs on the EU, fair to say the half Scottish Trump does not have the love for the Emerald Isle his part Irish predecessor did
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
I (we) watched the first 2 episodes of Slow Horses but decided it was too brutal for us. It looked like good quality stuff, though.
Black Doves is a cartoon. Would be OK if it actually was funny, but it isn't.
All the things considered, there hasn't been a huge number of Con to Ref defections. Certainly some, but maybe not as many as you might expect.
Will there be many red wall Lab to Ref defections? Must've been quite lonely for this lady.
Tom Harwood@tomhfh · 31m NEW: Ashfield Labour Councillor Cathy Mason has defected to the Reform Party.
There are now no longer any Labour Party representatives left on the Ashfield District Council.
Interesting.
Note quite as startling as it sounds - the last time Labour had more than 2 seats was in May 2019. Cons have 2. Ashfield Independents have 32 iirc.
But the Leeanderthal Man will be pleased, and I bet he was involved.
The big thing that will impact here is the Council Leader up in Crown Court later this month:
A date has been set for the trial of Ashfield District Council's leader Jason Zadrozny following the latest hearing in the case. Councillor Zadrozny has pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of fraud by false representation and four counts of income tax evasion.
Discussing formal logic with a spam caller makes them soon rethink the call. Good times.
For the have you been in an accident ones I just keep on asking how much will I get. I mean it passes the time.
I have real fun with the car accident ones, I’ll tell them about an accident I was involved in as a driver for about 10 minutes or so then I’ll say ‘I was really drunk and high on cocaine at the time of the accident, can I still get this compensation?’
It's best when they become irritated with you. Which they do far too often for their own business model, given that they are the ones doing the scamming.
One of them actually swore at me for wasting his time.
I did also have fun with the guy who called me from ‘Windows security department’ and I wasted him time talking about getting a new bay window.
I wasted the time of a bloke from ‘Windows security department’ by revealing, after a sufficiently tortuous duration, that the PC I was trying to boot up was in fact a pocket calculator. He got a bit stroppy.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
I (we) watched the first 2 episodes of Slow Horses but decided it was too brutal for us. It looked like good quality stuff, though.
Black Doves is a cartoon. Would be OK if it actually was funny, but it isn't.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
You're not handling this very well are you. In fact it reads like it's affecting you. I always said there should be an "open door" policy at PB where morons like you are welcomed but you really have me doubting my inclusiveness here.
Lying shit it is then.
I've always said pompous gits should be tolerated if they occasionally say something that isn't utterly moronic, but I don't think you ever have.
What a funny old sausage you are.
I have made rationale, cogent, intelligent, insightful, but above all frankly incontrovertible points about USAID which you seem to have been singularly (no, Nigel also) unable to grasp. I am tempted to put this down solely to your immense stupidity but I think, rather, that it contradicts your "truth" and hence you get all snarky. I mean yes, you are immensely stupid, that everyone can see, but to get hung up on the nature of USAID when there is an enormous amount of analysis supporting my position is, well, bizarre.
So looking forward to your next scathing "lying shit" post.
Go for it.
Give me a quote from me that illustrates this then.
Or even find a single person who has mentioned "American cultural imperialism" except you.
Also, are you defending the cutting off of USAID?
I can help here. I'm a skilled Topping interpreter.
He is saying that you can't in good conscience condemn the sudden cutting off of USAID with all of its dire consequences for some of the world's most needy people unless you at the same time sign up as a strong supporter of everything America does outside its own borders to further its influence and security.
Perhaps he believes that extra-judicial sanctions e.g. death or imprisonment as currently practiced by the US, is sufficient. The ICC and similar travellers are simply a redundancy. All you need are Seals and Blackhawks.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
I (we) watched the first 2 episodes of Slow Horses but decided it was too brutal for us. It looked like good quality stuff, though.
Black Doves is a cartoon. Would be OK if it actually was funny, but it isn't.
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
Both are modern spy dramas. Killing more people than the annual murder rate for the whole UK, pre episode is standard. As is no apparent societal effects from piles of corpses.
All the things considered, there hasn't been a huge number of Con to Ref defections. Certainly some, but maybe not as many as you might expect.
Will there be many red wall Lab to Ref defections? Must've been quite lonely for this lady.
Tom Harwood@tomhfh · 31m NEW: Ashfield Labour Councillor Cathy Mason has defected to the Reform Party.
There are now no longer any Labour Party representatives left on the Ashfield District Council.
Interesting.
Note quite as startling as it sounds - the last time Labour had more than 2 seats was in May 2019. Cons have 2. Ashfield Independents have 32 iirc.
But the Leeanderthal Man will be pleased, and I bet he was involved.
The big thing that will impact here is the Council Leader up in Crown Court later this month:
A date has been set for the trial of Ashfield District Council's leader Jason Zadrozny following the latest hearing in the case. Councillor Zadrozny has pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of fraud by false representation and four counts of income tax evasion.
The Jason Zadrozny story is so odd, I have no idea what to make of it. Perhaps the court case will shed some light, but not sure.
I've posted about it before in reasonable detail if you search on the name. What are you not sure about?
The Tom Hollis (Deputy Leader of Council and multiple crimes going back a decade) and Lee Anderson stories are equally interesting.
What's odd? That a local councillor might be a wrong'un? Plenty of those. Two conservative district councilors in my small home town went to the big house for taking backhanders from a property developer,
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Looks extremely close now between Cons and Ref on 307 combined and Lab and LD and SNP on 314 combined.
Though the 4 Greens, 2 Plaid and 2 SDLP and 1 Alliance should secure a second term for Starmer but in a very hung parliament and Cons and Ref would have a clear majority in England
Yes, this is a terribly exciting election campaign - too close to call. Not long to go now. I think it all depends on who is most successful at getting out their vote on the day.
Perhaps he believes that extra-judicial sanctions e.g. death or imprisonment as currently practiced by the US, is sufficient. The ICC and similar travellers are simply a redundancy. All you need are Seals and Blackhawks.
It would be fun if Musk and Chump both had a sealed arrest warrant at the ICC. Leak it to Chump via MI-whatever, and Chump can't really go anywhere except to Mar-a-Lago and back.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
All the things considered, there hasn't been a huge number of Con to Ref defections. Certainly some, but maybe not as many as you might expect.
Will there be many red wall Lab to Ref defections? Must've been quite lonely for this lady.
Tom Harwood@tomhfh · 31m NEW: Ashfield Labour Councillor Cathy Mason has defected to the Reform Party.
There are now no longer any Labour Party representatives left on the Ashfield District Council.
Interesting.
Note quite as startling as it sounds - the last time Labour had more than 2 seats was in May 2019. Cons have 2. Ashfield Independents have 32 iirc.
But the Leeanderthal Man will be pleased, and I bet he was involved.
The big thing that will impact here is the Council Leader up in Crown Court later this month:
A date has been set for the trial of Ashfield District Council's leader Jason Zadrozny following the latest hearing in the case. Councillor Zadrozny has pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of fraud by false representation and four counts of income tax evasion.
The Jason Zadrozny story is so odd, I have no idea what to make of it. Perhaps the court case will shed some light, but not sure.
I've posted about it before in reasonable detail if you search on the name. What are you not sure about?
The Tom Hollis (Deputy Leader of Council and multiple crimes going back a decade) and Lee Anderson stories are equally interesting.
What's odd? That a local councillor might be a wrong'un? Plenty of those. Two conservative district councilors in my small home town went to the big house for taking backhanders from a property developer,
The Deputy Leader of Council hooning down the traffic calmed High Street at 65mph in his Land Rover for Hairdressers, unaware that he was being followed by an unmarked police car, then reversing into it in the ASDA petrol station, is unusual.
Then next time phoning up the police and doing a panto over the phone committing perjury pretending he was about to be stabbed by his neighbour ('Put that knife down! Get away from me'!), who's wife was filming him doing it on her mobile phone, is quite something.
He's a bit thick, and rather blatant, is Mr Hollis.
Then getting his role back as Deputy Leader after multiple convictions for those is very Ashfield Local Politics.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.
Also fpt
Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.
The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.
Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.
If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.
Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
What is wrong about it.
One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.
I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand. 2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.
I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.
USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).
So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.
Your welcome.
I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
I find it pathetic that you start off by calling unnamed posters stark raving mad, but can't give a single example of what you mean.
I bet you are unable to give a single example of my spectacularly misguided and wilfully ignorant posts either.
I have explained countless times why posters, you included, were, and still are stark raving mad.
And your entire oeuvre this morning displays heroic quantities of ignorance, wilful or otherwise.
Like I said, no actual examples. Pathetic.
Look if you want to defend cutting USAID from one day to the next on some real grounds, go ahead, otherwise piss off.
The fact that your tiny brain cannot understand the conversations this morning about USAID and its role in American foreign policy is not my problem.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with some facts, or it might just be all too complicate for you, sonny.
So not willing to defend the cut off USAID.
You can't give a single quote from me can you? Shouldn't be hard as it was only this morning. If you can't give me even one actual quote from me to help my tiny brain understand what you mean by my ignorance, I'll just assume that you are a lying shit. Fair?
Black Doves Pyramids Topping
Black Doves and Pyramids neither "on this topic" nor "this morning".
Anyway Black Doves is truly crap. Don't waste any time on it.
Thanks, I won't. In fact I have 3 months of free Apple and plan to watch Slow Horses.
(don't say if that's crap too because I'm mentally committed)
Black Doves has a much better script. Genuinely funny
Slow Horses is more absorbing in its character work
Both are utterly ludicrous with corpses strewn over london and huge mass murders all tidied up in minutes and no one notices
Favouring one over the other is a sign of middling intellect or worse
Well thanks for the spoiler. I'd actually been looking forward to watching Slow Horses. My wife too. We both were.
I (we) watched the first 2 episodes of Slow Horses but decided it was too brutal for us. It looked like good quality stuff, though.
Black Doves is a cartoon. Would be OK if it actually was funny, but it isn't.
It's a discussion board. It would fall down a) if people didn't keep going; and/or b) everyone ignored everyone.
Indeed from what @kamski has described, tracking my every move and mood and post and response, the attempt to ignore me has been singularly unsuccessful.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
The NorKs are seemingly long gone, Kim got fed up with some of his best trained troops being sent into a meat grinder.
Although that would say quite a lot about how good his best-trained troops are, if indeed they were his best-trained troops - and also that he didn't cut a very good deal about how they'd be used. Still, I expect he got the tech he was asking for and expected to take heavy losses, so no great skin off his nose.
That said, I'd be sceptical about drawing too many conclusions. As with much of this war, the Kursk offensive is primarily political and we don't know how much Ukraine has committed to it. The timing, coming so close to (and perhaps expecting to straddle) the third anniversary of the invasion can't be ignored, while also demonstrating to Trump both Russia's weakness and Ukraine's will.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
I think the way he treated his wives is the reason.
Plus his first marriage was something out of a Pornhub film, shagging/marrying his brother's wife. SICK. SICK. SICK!
For Henry VIII was there a preponderance of Scots in the poll?
Surely Longshanks would be the worst rated King in Scotland?
Henry Tudor did huge damage in S. Scotland. Think William the B****** and Yorkshiremen. He'd actually negotiated a union of the crowns in the next generation, by marriage, and then look what he did, invade the impending in-laws.
While Elizabeth II is most popular with voters of all parties, Charles II is notably more popular with Tory voters, Richard III and Edward III notably more popular with Reform and Leave voters and James II with LD voters.
Oliver Cromwell is more popular with Labour and Reform voters than Tory and LD voters and Charles I relatively most unpopular with Labour voters
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
While Elizabeth II is most popular with voters of all parties, Charles II is notably more popular with Tory voters, Richard III and Edward III notably more popular with Reform voters and James II with LD voters.
Oliver Cromwell is more popular with Labour and Reform voters than Tory and LD voters and Charles I relatively most unpopular with Labour voters
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
I think the way he treated his wives is the reason.
Plus his first marriage was something out of a Pornhub film, shagging/marrying his brother's wife. SICK. SICK. SICK!
For Henry VIII was there a preponderance of Scots in the poll?
Surely Longshanks would be the worst rated King in Scotland?
Henry Tudor did huge damage in S. Scotland. Think William the B****** and Yorkshiremen. He'd actually negotiated a union of the crowns in the next generation, by marriage, and then look what he did, invade the impending in-laws.
You call it an invasion, it was a liberation.
The reason I went for Longshanks was because of Braveheart, which is the most historically inaccurate film ever made.
While Elizabeth II is most popular with voters of all parties, Charles II is notably more popular with Tory voters, Richard III and Edward III notably more popular with Reform voters and James II with LD voters.
Oliver Cromwell is more popular with Labour and Reform voters than Tory and LD voters and Charles I relatively most unpopular with Labour voters
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
The NorKs are seemingly long gone, Kim got fed up with some of his best trained troops being sent into a meat grinder.
Although that would say quite a lot about how good his best-trained troops are, if indeed they were his best-trained troops - and also that he didn't cut a very good deal about how they'd be used. Still, I expect he got the tech he was asking for and expected to take heavy losses, so no great skin off his nose.
That said, I'd be sceptical about drawing too many conclusions. As with much of this war, the Kursk offensive is primarily political and we don't know how much Ukraine has committed to it. The timing, coming so close to (and perhaps expecting to straddle) the third anniversary of the invasion can't be ignored, while also demonstrating to Trump both Russia's weakness and Ukraine's will.
AIUI the six-month anniversary of Ukraine's invasion of Kursk was the third 'deadline' Putin had given his troops to recapture all of Kursk. Launching another little incursion on that date gives Putin an extra little embarrassment. Not only has he not regained all of Kursk (again...) but the Ukrainians grab more of it.
The NorKs are seemingly long gone, Kim got fed up with some of his best trained troops being sent into a meat grinder.
Although that would say quite a lot about how good his best-trained troops are, if indeed they were his best-trained troops - and also that he didn't cut a very good deal about how they'd be used. Still, I expect he got the tech he was asking for and expected to take heavy losses, so no great skin off his nose.
That said, I'd be sceptical about drawing too many conclusions. As with much of this war, the Kursk offensive is primarily political and we don't know how much Ukraine has committed to it. The timing, coming so close to (and perhaps expecting to straddle) the third anniversary of the invasion can't be ignored, while also demonstrating to Trump both Russia's weakness and Ukraine's will.
Oh indeed, yesterday was the six-month anniversary of the initial Ukranian incursion in to Kursk.
I still can’t work out the story of the NorK troops. They were supposedly the best, but had clearly never met an enemy (NorK hasn’t been in a war for 60 years). Whether they were simply the top scorers at parade ground drill, as opposed to those with the best combat training, I don’t know.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
I think the way he treated his wives is the reason.
Plus his first marriage was something out of a Pornhub film, shagging/marrying his brother's wife. SICK. SICK. SICK!
For Henry VIII was there a preponderance of Scots in the poll?
Surely Longshanks would be the worst rated King in Scotland?
Henry Tudor did huge damage in S. Scotland. Think William the B****** and Yorkshiremen. He'd actually negotiated a union of the crowns in the next generation, by marriage, and then look what he did, invade the impending in-laws.
Wasn't there some sort of reverse takeover engineered some 400 years ago - and the Scots establishment got paid for it as well. Makes Trump's offer to take over Greenland look paltry.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
I think the way he treated his wives is the reason.
Plus his first marriage was something out of a Pornhub film, shagging/marrying his brother's wife. SICK. SICK. SICK!
For Henry VIII was there a preponderance of Scots in the poll?
Surely Longshanks would be the worst rated King in Scotland?
Henry Tudor did huge damage in S. Scotland. Think William the B****** and Yorkshiremen. He'd actually negotiated a union of the crowns in the next generation, by marriage, and then look what he did, invade the impending in-laws.
Wasn't there some sort of reverse takeover engineered some 400 years ago - and the Scots establishment got paid for it as well. Makes Trump's offer to take over Greenland look paltry.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
Discussing formal logic with a spam caller makes them soon rethink the call. Good times.
For the have you been in an accident ones I just keep on asking how much will I get. I mean it passes the time.
I have real fun with the car accident ones, I’ll tell them about an accident I was involved in as a driver for about 10 minutes or so then I’ll say ‘I was really drunk and high on cocaine at the time of the accident, can I still get this compensation?’
It's best when they become irritated with you. Which they do far too often for their own business model, given that they are the ones doing the scamming.
One of them actually swore at me for wasting his time.
I did also have fun with the guy who called me from ‘Windows security department’ and I wasted him time talking about getting a new bay window.
As a Mac user I sometimes have fun with callers from that department. After about 10 minutes I ask them if I need to click on the little apple at the top left hand corner of the screen.
Which reminds me, I have a new job as rugby writer for the Telegraph, can you tell?
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
I think the way he treated his wives is the reason.
Plus his first marriage was something out of a Pornhub film, shagging/marrying his brother's wife. SICK. SICK. SICK!
For Henry VIII was there a preponderance of Scots in the poll?
Surely Longshanks would be the worst rated King in Scotland?
Henry Tudor did huge damage in S. Scotland. Think William the B****** and Yorkshiremen. He'd actually negotiated a union of the crowns in the next generation, by marriage, and then look what he did, invade the impending in-laws.
Wasn't there some sort of reverse takeover engineered some 400 years ago - and the Scots establishment got paid for it as well. Makes Trump's offer to take over Greenland look paltry.
I like the idea of draining the swamp -- but I'm not sure how it can be done at Mar-a-Lago, legally. Declare the place a "public nuisance", as can be done in some states? Use eminent domain to seize it?
Suggestions are welcome.
(When Trumpistas talk about draining the swamp, it cracks me up because I recognize so many swamp creatures around him -- and know about the instruction he received from Roy Cohn.)
Comments
OK, 6 of the 9 are Trumpers, but I have some small hope for 2 of those.
@LeftieStats
‼️ Reform LEAD | MRP shows 3-way tie
🟣 REF 25% (+10)
🔵 CON 24% (-)
🔴 LAB 24% (-11)
🟠 LD 11% (-2)
🟢 GRN 8% (+1
Con 178
Ref 175
Lab 174
LD 57
SNP 37"
https://x.com/LeftieStats/status/1887851686405804111
Don't want Kamski monopolising you.
Though the 4 Greens, 2 Plaid and 2 SDLP and 1 Alliance should secure a second term for Starmer but in a very hung parliament and Cons and Ref would have a clear majority in England
I think it all depends on who is most successful at getting out their vote on the day.
Nevertheless, I don't see any problems with someone being critical of some parts of US foreign policy while at the same time believing that USAID might do some good. Or even thinking the whole of USAID should be wound down, while being critical of the way it's being done. Or of believing that American influence in the world is on balance a good thing, and thinking that cutting USAID is bad because it reduces that influence (especially if done in a stupid way), as well as hurting people currently being helped.
You don't take any position on what the Trump administration is doing with USAID. I don't think I've known you ever take any position on anything, or offer any policy alternatives on any subject. You seem only to be interested in criticising other people for things they haven't actually said, and imagining that you are cleverer than everyone else. Yes it's pretty annoying, and - top tip - it actually makes you look quite stupid. I don't normally bother because life's too short and I don't think you have anything valuable to offer. This exchange has confirmed it. I suggest we go back to ignoring each other.
Northern Ireland dragged into Trump’s trade war because of Brexit deal
Belfast could be forced to impose higher EU taxes on US goods in tit-for-tat tariff battle
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/07/northern-ireland-brexit-trade-deal-eu-tariffs-war-trump/
Steve Borthwick out to spring biggest surprise on France since Edward III
England seem to have collective amnesia over record thrashing two years ago but another humiliation could see axe fall in high places
There has been an understandable reluctance bordering on a collective amnesia within the England camp to confront the reality of France’s last visit to Twickenham.
“We haven’t mentioned it, actually,” Henry Slade, the centre, said earlier this week. “It’s a very different squad, and it’s a very different team to who played that weekend. That’s the first time I’ve thought about it actually.” Another survivor from that game, captain Maro Itoje, appears to have had his mind wiped by one of those flashing devices from the Men In Black films.
So as a public service announcement, let the record show that the last time Antoine Dupont and company came to town they ran in seven tries with almost embarrassing ease to inflict a 53-10 defeat, a record home loss in 154 years of English rugby history. No wonder a form of PTSD has emerged among the survivors where either it has been entirely forgotten or deemed a minor scrape rather than a deep scar…
… Unless of course they spring the biggest surprise on the French since Edward III invaded Normandy at the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Borthwick, too, must rely upon English misdirection and a dash of Gallic arrogance to overcome what would appear to be overwhelming odds (actually a six-point handicap with most bookmakers).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2025/02/07/england-steve-borthwick-france-2003-six-nations-performance/
Statement 1: "I don't think I've known you ever take any position on anything...You seem only to be interested in...and imagining you...and you...and you..."
Statement 2: "I suggest we go back [my emphasis] to ignoring each other."
If that is ignoring god help anyone you lavish attention upon.
I did also have fun with the guy who called me from ‘Windows security department’ and I wasted him time talking about getting a new bay window.
Another win for the NIMBYs
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1m5k7l07yzo
Black Doves is a cartoon. Would be OK if it actually was funny, but it isn't.
Brexit. Britain's best present since the introduction of syphilis.
The Tom Hollis (Deputy Leader of Council and multiple crimes going back a decade) and Lee Anderson stories are equally interesting.
He is saying that you can't in good conscience condemn the sudden cutting off of USAID with all of its dire consequences for some of the world's most needy people unless you at the same time sign up as a strong supporter of everything America does outside its own borders to further its influence and security.
£25 ex VAT
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1887783291685900636
So which is better iyo?
Two conservative district councilors in my small home town went to the big house for taking backhanders from a property developer,
They've probably both done enough already.
I think the way he treated his wives is the reason.
Plus his first marriage was something out of a Pornhub film, shagging/marrying his brother's wife. SICK. SICK. SICK!
Then next time phoning up the police and doing a panto over the phone committing perjury pretending he was about to be stabbed by his neighbour ('Put that knife down! Get away from me'!), who's wife was filming him doing it on her mobile phone, is quite something.
He's a bit thick, and rather blatant, is Mr Hollis.
Then getting his role back as Deputy Leader after multiple convictions for those is very Ashfield Local Politics.
Russia isn’t just out of men and materiel to fight in Ukraine, they’re also out of men and materiel to fight in Russia.
https://x.com/gloooud/status/1887844805155139672
The NorKs are seemingly long gone, Kim got fed up with some of his best trained troops being sent into a meat grinder.
Indeed from what @kamski has described, tracking my every move and mood and post and response, the attempt to ignore me has been singularly unsuccessful.
That said, I'd be sceptical about drawing too many conclusions. As with much of this war, the Kursk offensive is primarily political and we don't know how much Ukraine has committed to it. The timing, coming so close to (and perhaps expecting to straddle) the third anniversary of the invasion can't be ignored, while also demonstrating to Trump both Russia's weakness and Ukraine's will.
Good news for Free Korea though.
Oliver Cromwell is more popular with Labour and Reform voters than Tory and LD voters and Charles I relatively most unpopular with Labour voters
https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/YouGov_-_Kings_and_Queens_of_England_and_Britain.pdf
The reason I went for Longshanks was because of Braveheart, which is the most historically inaccurate film ever made.
NEW THREAD
I still can’t work out the story of the NorK troops. They were supposedly the best, but had clearly never met an enemy (NorK hasn’t been in a war for 60 years). Whether they were simply the top scorers at parade ground drill, as opposed to those with the best combat training, I don’t know.
Suggestions are welcome.
(When Trumpistas talk about draining the swamp, it cracks me up because I recognize so many swamp creatures around him -- and know about the instruction he received from Roy Cohn.)