Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

It’s looking better for the Dems ahead of the Nov 8 Midterms – politicalbetting.com

1234568

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    I've just checked every leading newspaper worldwide I can think of. Le Figaro. Bild. Al Jazerra. Times of India. Wall Street Journal. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Globe & Mail. New Zealand Herald. They all still lead with The Queen. One or two have Ukraine too.

    Only one that doesn't is the Jamaican Daily Gleaner, which talks about an opinion piece on moving to a Republic now in an article 3 or 4 from the top.

    If King Charles has a problem it will be in the Carribean first.

    Don't see why Jamaica becoming a Republic would be a problem.
    Because it hurts. It's a rejection. It's a weakening of a bond, however you cut it, and republics are as boring as hell.

    I don't like any country becoming a Republic. Jamaica has always been a bit different to other countries in the Carribean and a little bit more traditional and monarchy-like.

    I don't want it to go and I'll feel upset if it does.
    Barbados rejected us a few months ago and we seem to have got over it okay.
    I suspect most people didn't know we shared a Head of State with them.

    Belize is one that I find surprises people.
  • kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West
    was not outraged. But the
    fact that various people
    within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO
    expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or
    assumptions about the interests of russian speakers
    in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is
    conceivable the response would have been less unified
    (Hungary excepted) if he had
    not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating
    it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions
    stretched to the whole of
    Ukraine, even if that was
    wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party
    would persuade him, only
    military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking
    that he genuinely did not
    expect so much support from
    the West for Ukraine, not in
    the tangible ways it has
    come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but
    would they have felt able to
    do as much without all the diplomatic weight and
    support of Europe as a whole
    (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some
    flack but really does seem to
    have rapidly shifted direction,
    again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.
    We've always backed down
    with Putin, because he has
    powerful threats to employ,
    but he doesn't see, to have
    expected that this time everyone could no longer fool
    themselves that standing up
    to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with
    support (even if they would
    not actively participate) was not necessary. No one
    (outside stop the war and
    their far right comrades)
    could pretend any longer that playing Putin's game would
    work any longer.

    All very interesting but the whole world is now in a perilous position with a chance of ww3 breaking out

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,551
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
  • WillGWillG Posts: 515

    WillG said:

    The news need to drop the monarchy a bit and start talking about Ukraine. Just WTF is happening there!?

    From some reports the Russians seem to be collapsing faster than France in WWII.

    The Russians have had their first battlefield defeat since 1942. The Russians were always going to lose the war, but it was likely to be because of a long drawn out guerilla war. A conventional military thrashing is humiliating for them.

    Some are talking about Putin being replaced by another
    nationalist strongman, but
    nationalist strongmen need
    military forces to sustain
    their rule. In Ukraine, Russia is not just losing her army,
    but her mercenary network,
    her national reserves, her police forces, her conscript
    pools. All are getting throSame with my stepdaughter, who's been severely ill since having her second vaccination in February. Her immune system seems to have collapsed, basically, and she's become allergic to most foods. She's down to 7 stone and can barely leave her bedroom. Multiple tests, ongoing, with no apparent cause being found. It looks like some kind of MCAS, but no one will diagnose. She was a healthy, fit and active 35 year old and now feels that her life is over. wn
    into the meat grinder because Putin is psychologically unable to admit defeat. No wonder they are putting roadblocks up around the Kremlin.
    I wouldn't get carried away yet. This is a setback for the Russians but the war is a long way from over. There could also be unpredictable blowbacks for the west

    You accidentally pasted in your anti-vaxxerism in the middle there.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,958
    I seem to remember Sky doing a "Brexit-free" temporary pop-up news channel for all other news that was getting crowded out. Maybe they could do the same here and have "HMQ tribute news" and "all other news including the crazy stuff going on in Ukraine".
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721

    Owen Jones
    @OwenJones84
    ·
    5h
    It really does look as though the Russian army is being routed by Ukraine's forces. We could be about to find out how a nuclear power headed by an autocrat will respond to being defeated in a land invasion of its own choosing.

    ===

    By falling out of a window?

    But Owen it’s not a land invasion. Just a special operation.

    I think the choice early on to try to minimise this to Russian public opinion makes real escalation now much more difficult. A bit too late to get people behind full mobilisation too. Might have got away with it a few months ago after the capture of Severodonetsk and Mariupol.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,025

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    That's a really interesting question, and I think it depends whether you mean widespread fame, or want to add in element of how it was achieved - by long service or notoriety.

    I might add Nelson Mandela, Solzhenitsyn, Pope John Paul II, and perhaps Gandhi or Indira Ghandhi.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,819
    edited September 10

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    Look quite swollen and redder than his face. Blood pressure?
    No, more likely arthritis. That level of hand oedema would only be seen with severe oedema elsewhere if cardiac.
    He’s had fingers like this since he was
    married to Diana and presumably before. Check out old photos.


    I assume it’s a weird hereditary thing.
    It also explains his popularity with the ladies. Have you ever seen Camilla looking unhappy?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,634

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    Look quite swollen and redder than his face. Blood pressure?
    No, more likely arthritis. That level of hand oedema would only be seen with severe oedema elsewhere if cardiac.
    He’s had fingers like this since he was married to Diana and presumably before. Check out old photos.

    I assume it’s a weird hereditary thing.
    They look more normal in this photo from the early nineties.


    That famous photo of him and Diana when first engaged…his fingers are already far more sausagey than you’d expect for a man of his build.

    I can’t post it for some reason.
    Doing some googling, he has apparently joked about his own “sausage fingers” since the 70s.

  • darkagedarkage Posts: 3,200
    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West was not outraged. But the fact that various people within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or assumptions about the interests of russian speakers in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is conceivable the response would have been less unified (Hungary excepted) if he had not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions stretched to the whole of Ukraine, even if that was wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party would persuade him, only military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking that he genuinely did not expect so much support from the West for Ukraine, not in the tangible ways it has come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but would they have felt able to do as much without all the diplomatic weight and support of Europe as a whole (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some flack but really does seem to have rapidly shifted direction, again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.

    We've always backed down with Putin, because he has powerful threats to employ, but he doesn't see, to have expected that this time everyone could no longer fool themselves that standing up to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with support (even if they would not actively participate) was not necessary. No one (outside stop the war and their far right comrades) could pretend any longer that playing Putin's game would work any longer.
    Yeah - perhaps the 'gone full tonto' comment was accurate.
    I would say again, that Fiona Hill's book is very good on explaining his mindset. Particularly on the long term causes. Certainly there are a lot of mysteries. Was Putin always a threat, or did the threat emerge as a response to NATO expansion?
  • kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West
    was not outraged. But the
    fact that various people
    within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO
    expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or
    assumptions about the interests of russian speakers
    in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is
    conceivable the response would have been less unified
    (Hungary excepted) if he had
    not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating
    it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions
    stretched to the whole of
    Ukraine, even if that was
    wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party
    would persuade him, only
    military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking
    that he genuinely did not
    expect so much support from
    the West for Ukraine, not in
    the tangible ways it has
    come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but
    would they have felt able to
    do as much without all the diplomatic weight and
    support of Europe as a whole
    (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some
    flack but really does seem to
    have rapidly shifted direction,
    again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.
    We've always backed down
    with Putin, because he has
    powerful threats to employ,
    but he doesn't see, to have
    expected that this time everyone could no longer fool
    themselves that standing up
    to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with
    support (even if they would
    not actively participate) was not necessary. No one
    (outside stop the war and
    their far right comrades)
    could pretend any longer that playing Putin's game would
    work any longer.

    All very interesting but the whole world is now in a perilous position with a chance of ww3 breaking out

    Great username. Which particular Russian highlands are you from?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,025
    edited September 10
    kinabalu said:

    I've just checked every leading newspaper worldwide I can think of. Le Figaro. Bild. Al Jazerra. Times of India. Wall Street Journal. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Globe & Mail. New Zealand Herald. They all still lead with The Queen. One or two have Ukraine too.

    Only one that doesn't is the Jamaican Daily Gleaner, which talks about an opinion piece on moving to a Republic now in an article 3 or 4 from the top.

    If King Charles has a problem it will be in the Carribean first.

    Don't see why Jamaica becoming a Republic would be a problem.
    It needs to be an opportunity.

    I think working out how the Commonwealth may develop is going to be very strategic for both the King and the Prime Minister.

    How does one transform an association of nations based on history, perhaps looking backwards in some respects, into something for a stronger future. Supporting self-development of less wealthy member countries is going to need to be significant imo - perhaps based on foundational things such as governance, rule of law, militaries being subordinate to civilian authorities and so on.

    A broadened role for the British Council?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,551
    edited September 10
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    Look quite swollen and redder than his face. Blood pressure?
    No, more likely arthritis. That level of hand oedema would only be seen with severe oedema elsewhere if cardiac.
    He’s had fingers like this since he was married to Diana and presumably before. Check out old photos.

    I assume it’s a weird hereditary thing.
    They look more normal in this photo from the early nineties.


    Poor Diana! :(

    Yes, she was manipulative and neurotic and eventually quite mad but my take is always that it was only what being married to man that didn't love her and only wanted her for the heir and the spare did to her.

    Charles was a bastard! He may be ascending with Camilla but we should never forget that.
  • It is also interesting that the west which has locked citizens in their homes for 2 years and foisted dodgy mrna jabs on people that are killing them is taking the moral high ground
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    The news need to drop the monarchy a bit and start talking about Ukraine. Just WTF is happening there!?

    From some reports the Russians seem to be collapsing faster than France in WWII.

    The Russians have had their first battlefield defeat since 1942. The Russians were always going to lose the war, but it was likely to be because of a long drawn out guerilla war. A conventional military thrashing is humiliating for them.

    Some are talking about Putin being replaced by another
    nationalist strongman, but
    nationalist strongmen need
    military forces to sustain
    their rule. In Ukraine, Russia is not just losing her army,
    but her mercenary network,
    her national reserves, her police forces, her conscript
    pools. All are getting throSame with my stepdaughter, who's been severely ill since having her second vaccination in February. Her immune system seems to have collapsed, basically, and she's become allergic to most foods. She's down to 7 stone and can barely leave her bedroom. Multiple tests, ongoing, with no apparent cause being found. It looks like some kind of MCAS, but no one will diagnose. She was a healthy, fit and active 35 year old and now feels that her life is over. wn
    into the meat grinder because Putin is psychologically unable to admit defeat. No wonder they are putting roadblocks up around the Kremlin.
    I wouldn't get carried away yet. This is a setback for the Russians but the war is a long way from over. There could also be unpredictable blowbacks for the west

    You accidentally pasted in your anti-vaxxerism in the middle there.
    Hur hur hur,

    Console.WriteLine("take that! you sockpuppet theorists");
  • We already have MaxPB on here with likely serious vaccine injuries....others likely to become disabled due to the vaxx in time
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,984

    It is also interesting that the west which has locked citizens in their homes for 2 years and foisted dodgy mrna jabs on people that are killing them is taking the moral high ground

    Dodgy MNRA jabs?
  • kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West
    was not outraged. But the
    fact that various people
    within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO
    expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or
    assumptions about the interests of russian speakers
    in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is
    conceivable the response would have been less unified
    (Hungary excepted) if he had
    not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating
    it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions
    stretched to the whole of
    Ukraine, even if that was
    wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party
    would persuade him, only
    military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking
    that he genuinely did not
    expect so much support from
    the West for Ukraine, not in
    the tangible ways it has
    come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but
    would they have felt able to
    do as much without all the diplomatic weight and
    support of Europe as a whole
    (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some
    flack but really does seem to
    have rapidly shifted direction,
    again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.
    We've always backed down
    with Putin, because he has
    powerful threats to employ,
    but he doesn't see, to have
    expected that this time everyone could no longer fool
    themselves that standing up
    to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with
    support (even if they would
    not actively participate) was not necessary. No one
    (outside stop the war and
    their far right comrades)
    could pretend any longer that playing Putin's game would
    work any longer.

    All very interesting but the whole world is now in a perilous position with a chance of ww3 breaking out

    No chance.

    Russia is losing versus Ukraine alone.

    If it escalated into WW3 then Russia would be absolutely annihilated - just from conventional weapons.

    Russia has no power, no friends, no allies, no weaponry, no money and no future.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    edited September 10

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West
    was not outraged. But the
    fact that various people
    within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO
    expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or
    assumptions about the interests of russian speakers
    in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is
    conceivable the response would have been less unified
    (Hungary excepted) if he had
    not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating
    it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions
    stretched to the whole of
    Ukraine, even if that was
    wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party
    would persuade him, only
    military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking
    that he genuinely did not
    expect so much support from
    the West for Ukraine, not in
    the tangible ways it has
    come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but
    would they have felt able to
    do as much without all the diplomatic weight and
    support of Europe as a whole
    (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some
    flack but really does seem to
    have rapidly shifted direction,
    again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.
    We've always backed down
    with Putin, because he has
    powerful threats to employ,
    but he doesn't see, to have
    expected that this time everyone could no longer fool
    themselves that standing up
    to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with
    support (even if they would
    not actively participate) was not necessary. No one
    (outside stop the war and
    their far right comrades)
    could pretend any longer that playing Putin's game would
    work any longer.

    All very interesting but the whole world is now in a perilous position with a chance of ww3 breaking out

    No chance.

    Russia is losing versus Ukraine alone.

    If it escalated into WW3 then Russia would be absolutely annihilated - just from conventional weapons.

    Russia has no power, no friends, no allies, no weaponry, no money and no future.
    Well it has North Korea as a friend. China feels like an embarrassed acquaintance.

    Edit: And Syria.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,634

    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    GIN1138 said:
    Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
    Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?

    Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
    In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
    Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do

    Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed

    Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding

    But the new King is under intense pressure
    I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
    No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
    Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
    You also need a soupçon of charisma
    Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
    Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
    Hmmm. There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.

    7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
    I’m a royalist but the TV images are not good. He looks irritable, querulous and bossy in a bad way. A small man in big shoes

    But I agree it is just 7 seconds
    Honestly. Twitter sometimes! (Well, Twitter most of the time…) I watched the whole thing and saw it in context. It was fine. He’d just signed a couple of them and moved things around himself because the ornaments were in the way. In context and not cut into a 5 second clip, it was nothing.

    I saw it live and spotted it live, and felt uncomfortable watching it. But I didn't say anything at the time because he's just lost his mother and this is all a bit overwhelming, but it was very poor behaviour.

    If it wasn't for the fact that he's on the TV camera within 48 hours of his mother dying, because of her dying, I'd be a lot less sympathetic to that sort of behaviour. It was rude.
    Nah he was speaking to an equerry who should should have spotted it. And frankly it never should been an issue in the first place. The only mistake was to forget he was on tv.

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,537

    We already have MaxPB on here with likely serious vaccine injuries....others likely to become disabled due to the vaxx in time

    Do one.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West
    was not outraged. But the
    fact that various people
    within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO
    expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or
    assumptions about the interests of russian speakers
    in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is
    conceivable the response would have been less unified
    (Hungary excepted) if he had
    not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating
    it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions
    stretched to the whole of
    Ukraine, even if that was
    wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party
    would persuade him, only
    military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking
    that he genuinely did not
    expect so much support from
    the West for Ukraine, not in
    the tangible ways it has
    come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but
    would they have felt able to
    do as much without all the diplomatic weight and
    support of Europe as a whole
    (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some
    flack but really does seem to
    have rapidly shifted direction,
    again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.
    We've always backed down
    with Putin, because he has
    powerful threats to employ,
    but he doesn't see, to have
    expected that this time everyone could no longer fool
    themselves that standing up
    to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with
    support (even if they would
    not actively participate) was not necessary. No one
    (outside stop the war and
    their far right comrades)
    could pretend any longer that playing Putin's
    game would
    work any longer.
    All very interesting but the whole world is now in a perilous position with a chance of ww3 breaking out

    Actually the whole world isn’t in a perilous position. Only about 2/3 of the mid and high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. Especially now the 2022 harvest is largely in.

    If NATO and Russia discharge their entire nuclear arsenals we’ll all be dead, but most of China, Korea (maybe not Japan), India, SE Asia, Latin America, much of the Middle East and the whole of Africa will be absolutely untouched. It’ll be a world war only in the sense WW1 was a world war, and we don’t even have tropical empires involved anymore.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,002

    We already have MaxPB on here with likely serious vaccine injuries....others likely to become disabled due to the vaxx in time

    Go away
  • That's enough of that @PBModerator
  • We already have MaxPB on here with likely serious vaccine injuries....others likely to become disabled due to the vaxx in time

    You are out of order commenting on a posters health

    Just wrong
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,453
    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
    No, I think it is just localised to his hands. His plethora face looks normal for someone who has spent a lot of time in the sun. Gout is rarely more than 1 joint at a time, and exquisitely painful.

    I think some arthritis is most likely.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Excellent liberation video

    The rescued Uke women want to give the soldiers fritters

    https://twitter.com/dovewoman1/status/1568688884804120576?s=21&t=uHcrV3JxEGBkWaffIBFyHA

    i feel pity for anyone who sided with
    Putin/Russia in this appalling war. You really were overtly choosing evil

    Be careful with the word evil Leon. All nations have their reasons for doing things even if they seem unconscionable to us. Remember many of the actions of the British empire could be considered evil

    Yes, they could. That wouldn't make a similar choice by Russia now less evil.

    Things are rarely so black and white, but this time they really were - Putin launched a war of territorial aggression on flimsy pretexts which frequently contradicted one another, proving the territory bit was the real reason. None of the other ones hold up for anyone trying to justify Putin's actions. At best they can try to explain it - NATO, russian speakers etc - but his 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gave the game away on anyone trying that.
    The most you can concede is that it was an invasion of a sovereign state, similar to what happened with the US in Iraq. But the americans came up with better reasons. Putin's rants about Ukraine not being a real country, and suggestions that Russia has a 'claim' on the former Soviet states and territories of the Russian empire, were just bizarre. They actually served the purpose of turning the whole of Europe against the him. In particular, they made things impossible for Germany, its main 'ally' in the west. Right now it looks like a massive mistake.
    It's hard to imagine, of course, that he could have come up with something that would have meant the West
    was not outraged. But the
    fact that various people
    within the West do eat up his nonsense about NATO
    expansion and the need for 'independent' spheres, or
    assumptions about the interests of russian speakers
    in some irredentist approach, suggests that it is
    conceivable the response would have been less unified
    (Hungary excepted) if he had
    not played to the home crowd quite so obviously by stating
    it in the terms he did.

    It made clear his ambitions
    stretched to the whole of
    Ukraine, even if that was
    wildly overambitious, and that no concession from any party
    would persuade him, only
    military defeat could.

    I hope I am right in thinking
    that he genuinely did not
    expect so much support from
    the West for Ukraine, not in
    the tangible ways it has
    come. Yes, the USA is still doing the heavy lifting, but
    would they have felt able to
    do as much without all the diplomatic weight and
    support of Europe as a whole
    (Hungary excepted again)? Germany has gotten some
    flack but really does seem to
    have rapidly shifted direction,
    again in a way Putin may not have anticipated.
    We've always backed down
    with Putin, because he has
    powerful threats to employ,
    but he doesn't see, to have
    expected that this time everyone could no longer fool
    themselves that standing up
    to him, insofar as backing Ukraine to the hilt with
    support (even if they would
    not actively participate) was not necessary. No one
    (outside stop the war and
    their far right comrades)
    could pretend any longer that playing Putin's game would
    work any longer.

    All very interesting but the whole world is now in a perilous position with a chance of ww3 breaking out

    Great username. Which particular Russian highlands are you from?
    The moral highlands, it seems. Ying to WillG's yang.
  • And its gone. Good riddance.
  • FossFoss Posts: 565
    MattW said:

    kinabalu said:

    I've just checked every leading newspaper worldwide I can think of. Le Figaro. Bild. Al Jazerra. Times of India. Wall Street Journal. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Globe & Mail. New Zealand Herald. They all still lead with The Queen. One or two have Ukraine too.

    Only one that doesn't is the Jamaican Daily Gleaner, which talks about an opinion piece on moving to a Republic now in an article 3 or 4 from the top.

    If King Charles has a problem it will be in the Carribean first.

    Don't see why Jamaica becoming a Republic would be a problem.
    I think working out how the Commonwealth may develop is going to be very strategic for both the King and the Prime Minister.
    It does seem to be expanding away from it’s origin with the Empire into a wider general alliance/grouping.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721

    It is also interesting that the west which has locked citizens in their homes for 2 years and foisted dodgy mrna jabs on people that are killing them is taking the moral high ground

    Oh I see, he’s one of them.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,551

    We already have MaxPB on here with likely serious vaccine injuries....others likely to become disabled due to the vaxx in time

    Banned! WTG PB Moderator!
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,775
    Can't chillblains leave fingers permanently swollen? Perhaps lack of winter heating at Gordonstoun might account for it. Just a theory, IANAM
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    biggles said:

    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    GIN1138 said:
    Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
    Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?

    Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
    In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
    Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do

    Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed

    Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding

    But the new King is under intense pressure
    I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
    No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
    Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
    You also need a soupçon of charisma
    Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
    Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
    Hmmm. There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.

    7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
    I’m a royalist but the TV images are not good. He looks irritable, querulous and bossy in a bad way. A small man in big shoes

    But I agree it is just 7 seconds
    Honestly. Twitter sometimes! (Well, Twitter most of the time…) I watched the whole thing and saw it in context. It was fine. He’d just signed a couple of them and moved things around himself because the ornaments were in the way. In context and not cut into a 5 second clip, it was nothing.

    I saw it live and spotted it live, and felt uncomfortable watching it. But I didn't say anything at the time because he's just lost his mother and this is all a bit overwhelming, but it was very poor behaviour.

    If it wasn't for the fact that he's on the TV camera within 48 hours of his mother dying, because of her dying, I'd be a lot less sympathetic to that sort of behaviour. It was rude.
    Nah he was speaking to an equerry who should should have spotted it. And frankly it never should been an issue in the first place. The only mistake was to forget he was on tv.

    Fuck off. Do you think you should behave differently to other people depending whether you think whether you are observed or not?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,634
    Foxy said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
    No, I think it is just localised to his hands. His plethora face looks normal for someone who has spent a lot of time in the sun. Gout is rarely more than 1 joint at a time, and exquisitely painful.

    I think some arthritis is most likely.
    That’s exactly what it is. As above, it’s not something he does (or could) hide and he’s joked about it for years. We just mostly haven’t noticed because we mostly don’t pay attention to royalty.

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,944
    edited September 10
    Ed Davey managing to get a sentence in about climate change when talking to King Charles III today.
  • Once Russia loses the war is it too much to hope that they'll stop meddling stirring up discord?

    Just imagine if Twitter suddenly became a place people could actually have rational discussion.

    On second thoughts, that really is a bridge too far.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    TimS said:

    Owen Jones
    @OwenJones84
    ·
    5h
    It really does look as though the Russian army is being routed by Ukraine's forces. We could be about to find out how a nuclear power headed by an autocrat will respond to being defeated in a land invasion of its own choosing.

    ===

    By falling out of a window?

    But Owen it’s not a land invasion. Just a special operation.

    I think the choice early on to try to minimise this to Russian public opinion makes real escalation now much more difficult. A bit too late to get people behind full mobilisation too. Might have got away with it a few months ago after the capture of Severodonetsk and Mariupol.
    They were also insisting everything was going to plan just weeks ago, even with the obvious switch in focus after the pullback around Kyiv and so on.

    Yes, forces can regroup and territorial setbacks reversed, but judging by snippets of Russian news reports, they haven't managed to sell current events as an ordered plan, unsurprisingly.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721
    Political Twitter may be about to discover what a day collar is, and I for one think this is exactly the kind of distraction we need after the last few days

    https://twitter.com/rmcunliffe/status/1568713130028716032?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    I think this is the most harm warming video of the day:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pq6eGAXgOb0
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Andy_JS said:

    Ed Davey managing to get a sentence in about climate change when talking to King Charles III today.

    The old professional that Charles is just did not respond, leaving the comment hanging before they moved quickly to condolences.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,453
    edited September 10
    biggles said:

    Foxy said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
    No, I think it is just localised to his hands. His plethora face looks normal for someone who has spent a lot of time in the sun. Gout is rarely more than 1 joint at a time, and exquisitely painful.

    I think some arthritis is most likely.
    That’s exactly what it is. As above, it’s not something he does (or could) hide and he’s joked about it for years. We just mostly haven’t noticed because we mostly don’t pay attention to royalty.

    Perhaps all that hunting, shooting and polo has caused a degree of injury over the decades.

    The Windsors are a pretty health family, and not seemingly due to medical care, just strong natural constitutions.

    I think it will be a longish reign by historical standards, and William a similar age when he takes over.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,634
    edited September 10
    IshmaelZ said:

    biggles said:

    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    GIN1138 said:
    Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
    Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?

    Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
    In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
    Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do

    Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed

    Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding

    But the new King is under intense pressure
    I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
    No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
    Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
    You also need a soupçon of charisma
    Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
    Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
    Hmmm. There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.

    7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
    I’m a royalist but the TV images are not good. He looks irritable, querulous and bossy in a bad way. A small man in big shoes

    But I agree it is just 7 seconds
    Honestly. Twitter sometimes! (Well, Twitter most of the time…) I watched the whole thing and saw it in context. It was fine. He’d just signed a couple of them and moved things around himself because the ornaments were in the way. In context and not cut into a 5 second clip, it was nothing.

    I saw it live and spotted it live, and felt uncomfortable watching it. But I didn't say anything at the time because he's just lost his mother and this is all a bit overwhelming, but it was very poor behaviour.

    If it wasn't for the fact that he's on the TV camera within 48 hours of his mother dying, because of her dying, I'd be a lot less sympathetic to that sort of behaviour. It was rude.
    Nah he was speaking to an equerry who should should have spotted it. And frankly it never should been an issue in the first place. The only mistake was to forget he was on tv.

    Fuck off. Do you think you should behave differently to other people depending whether you think whether you are observed or not?
    Very mature. Straight to swearing and insults. Who has the bad manners?

    The point, which someone with an IQ over 80 would understand, is that an equerry won’t be offended by being ordered in that way. They get much worse in their other jobs*. I was obviously then just flagging that unfortunately the country is filled with inexperienced idiots like you who won’t know that, so it’s worth not doing it on tv.

    *To fill in the gap for you, it’s a military post.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093

    And its gone. Good riddance.

    Shortest yet?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    ...
    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    Look quite swollen and redder than his face. Blood pressure?
    No, more likely arthritis. That level of hand oedema would only be seen with severe oedema elsewhere if cardiac.
    He’s had fingers like this since he was married to Diana and presumably before. Check out old photos.

    I assume it’s a weird hereditary thing.
    They look more normal in this photo from the early nineties.


    Poor Diana! :(

    Yes, she was manipulative and neurotic and eventually quite mad but my take is always that it was only what being married to man that didn't love her and only wanted her for the heir and the spare did to her.

    Charles was a bastard! He may be ascending with Camilla but we should never forget that.
    I don't think it helped, but she was the same person before, during and after her marriage. Looking for someone to complete her.
  • TimS said:

    Political Twitter may be about to discover what a day collar is, and I for one think this is exactly the kind of distraction we need after the last few days

    https://twitter.com/rmcunliffe/status/1568713130028716032?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    Even if it's Just A Lovely Necklace, how does she stop wearing it without people pointing and giggling?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,812
    TimS said:



    Spare a thought for the energy crisis though. Not often you expect a debt-funded government splurge of over 100bn to avert historically high energy prices relegated to third place in the news.

    Yes, it's curious, and I wonder who gains by it? I don't think the country is going round saying "God bless you, Liz Truss" as she might reasonably have hoped - they've stopped panicking over rising energy costs, but that's about it. On the other hand, Starmer's quite effective counter - why are you protecting oil company profits with megabillions from the next generation? - has also not got much of a hearing. On balance it perhaps makes it harder for Truss to get a large bounce.

    Are we expecting any polls soon? Or have they all downed tools in sympathy with the Met Office?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    TimS said:

    Political Twitter may be about to discover what a day collar is, and I for one think this is exactly the kind of distraction we need after the last few days

    https://twitter.com/rmcunliffe/status/1568713130028716032?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    I mean, FFS
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    TimS said:

    Political Twitter may be about to discover what a day collar is, and I for one think this is exactly the kind of distraction we need after the last few days

    https://twitter.com/rmcunliffe/status/1568713130028716032?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    Some of the replies to that led to some rather hilarious ranting about the monarchy in the vein you would expect, but there was one comment that, at least as a world view, made me think for a moment. It was

    A royal death really separates the socialists from the liberals doesn't it.

    Now, I don't think that is true, but as a worldview about how to distinguish those on one's own side who are the right sort I thought it interesting.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    PB knew about the Necklace 6 weeks before the rest of the world and it is ENTIRELY because of me being a genius and incredibly perverse and you should all give me money
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,634
    edited September 10

    TimS said:

    Political Twitter may be about to discover what a day collar is, and I for one think this is exactly the kind of distraction we need after the last few days

    https://twitter.com/rmcunliffe/status/1568713130028716032?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    Even if it's Just A Lovely Necklace, how does she stop wearing it without people pointing and giggling?
    Doubt any journalists or other politicians are going to touch the subject. It would make their own sex life fair game.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 30,018

    And its gone. Good riddance.

    Shortest yet?
    Please sir, can we have a better troll for the next one?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    I DEMAND MONEY
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721
    I know he’s not to everyone’s taste but Guy Verhofstadt actually has a vision for Europe, and it is one that consistently includes moral clarity on the biggest long term threat to the continent.

    https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1568496749962199040?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    TimS said:

    I know he’s not to everyone’s taste but Guy Verhofstadt actually has a vision for Europe, and it is one that consistently includes moral clarity on the biggest long term threat to the continent.

    https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1568496749962199040?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    I've long respected his clarity. He has not been afraid to criticise the EU on a range of matters, albeit from a different direction to those who want it to be less encompassing, and does not disguise his preferred goal one bit.
  • I had a vaccine and I've got serious issues
  • But I had serious issues before the vaccine, thanks for coming to my TED Talk
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    biggles said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    biggles said:

    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    GIN1138 said:
    Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
    Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?

    Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
    In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
    Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do

    Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed

    Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding

    But the new King is under intense pressure
    I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
    No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
    Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
    You also need a soupçon of charisma
    Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
    Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
    Hmmm. There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.

    7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
    I’m a royalist but the TV images are not good. He looks irritable, querulous and bossy in a bad way. A small man in big shoes

    But I agree it is just 7 seconds
    Honestly. Twitter sometimes! (Well, Twitter most of the time…) I watched the whole thing and saw it in context. It was fine. He’d just signed a couple of them and moved things around himself because the ornaments were in the way. In context and not cut into a 5 second clip, it was nothing.

    I saw it live and spotted it live, and felt uncomfortable watching it. But I didn't say anything at the time because he's just lost his mother and this is all a bit overwhelming, but it was very poor behaviour.

    If it wasn't for the fact that he's on the TV camera within 48 hours of his mother dying, because of her dying, I'd be a lot less sympathetic to that sort of behaviour. It was rude.
    Nah he was speaking to an equerry who should should have spotted it. And frankly it never should been an issue in the first place. The only mistake was to forget he was on tv.

    Fuck off. Do you think you should behave differently to other people depending whether you think whether you are observed or not?
    Very mature. Straight to swearing and insults. Who has the bad manners?

    The point, which someone with an IQ over 80 would understand, is that an equerry won’t be offended by being ordered in that way. They get much worse in their other jobs*. I was obviously then just flagging that unfortunately the country is filled with inexperienced idiots like you who won’t know that, so it’s worth not doing it on tv.

    *To fill in the gap for you, it’s a military post.
    Only a complete and unadulterated c--t would call fuck off, swearing.

    Do you treat waiters in restaurants like that? If not, why not?

    And it's not a point I would usually make, but I haven't a bloody clue what my IQ is, but I do have a first from Oxford and a PhD. So fuck off thicko.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Christopher Steele
    @Chris_D_Steele
    The Ukrainian counter-offensive in Kharkiv/Kherson has so far exceeded all expectations. If the ragbag Russian army of indisciplined drunks and thieves is routed, as now seems possible, it will be the end for Putin. Despite his propaganda machine, he can’t survive defeat in war.

    https://twitter.com/Chris_D_Steele/status/1568665013774176258
  • Bring back @thehighlands
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    Interesting. Saw this story linked from someone going 'They're not even hiding it anymore' (not sure what they thought was being hidden).


    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will address U.S. defense contractors later this month when he headlines the annual Future Force Capabilities Conference and Exhibition hosted by the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA).


    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3636685-zelensky-to-headline-us-defense-industry-conference/
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244
    Leon said:

    I DEMAND MONEY

    Write a book, I hear successful authors can do quite well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244

    And its gone. Good riddance.

    Shortest yet?
    Please sir, can we have a better troll for the next one?
    *waves*

    Been trying for years here.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    I DEMAND MONEY

    Write a book, I hear successful authors can do quite well.
    Tbh I just want slavish adoration and acknowledgement that my Necklace and Dress insight - two minutes after tuning into the first Truss Sunak debate - was the greatest piece of psycho-political divination in the history of humankind, let alone PB. if you grant me that, I’ll forego payment
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    Leon said:

    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


    I didn't know bondage jewellery was a thing before this, but I think I'd still be surprised to find out that there was a bondage formal daywear collection. I mean she may like the dress because she's kinky, but I still don't think it's a kinky dress.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,958

    Leon said:

    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


    I didn't know bondage jewellery was a thing before this, but I think I'd still be surprised to find out that there was a bondage formal daywear collection. I mean she may like the dress because she's kinky, but I still don't think it's a kinky dress.
    And is there anything to divine from watch and/or earrings?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565

    Leon said:

    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


    I didn't know bondage jewellery was a thing before this, but I think I'd still be surprised to find out that there was a bondage formal daywear collection. I mean she may like the dress because she's kinky, but I still don't think it's a kinky dress.
    Trust me - fnarr - it’s a kinky dress

    It’s bondage-motif daywear for a sub expressing herself in a vanilla world
  • Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,453

    But I had serious issues before the vaccine, thanks for coming to my TED Talk

    I did get shingles a week or so after my third dose.

    New bivalent vaccine Moderna booked for next
    week. I saw too much needless death to be anti-vaxx.
  • Unlike the late QEIII's, seems that PB's collective heart is NOT in (or rather with) "thehighlands"!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,453

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
    To be fair, sweet FA is happening politically until its over.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    I know he’s not to everyone’s taste but Guy Verhofstadt actually has a vision for Europe, and it is one that consistently includes moral clarity on the biggest long term threat to the continent.

    https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1568496749962199040?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    I've long respected his clarity. He has not been afraid to criticise the EU on a range of matters, albeit from a different direction to those who want it to be less encompassing, and does not disguise his preferred goal one bit.
    He's found himself a niche as a parody of a eurocrat. Like Katie Hopkins - they've stopped trying to convince anyone new, they just do the greatest hits.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    I DEMAND MONEY

    Write a book, I hear successful authors can do quite well.
    Tbh I just want slavish adoration and acknowledgement that my Necklace and Dress insight - two minutes after tuning into the first Truss Sunak debate - was the greatest piece of psycho-political divination in the history of humankind, let alone PB. if you grant me that, I’ll forego payment
    Yes, you did well. But how many of us would have a clue about bondage jewellery. A whole new world of learning is opening up.

    I’d like to remind readers I was a week ahead of Twitter or the rest of PB in predicting 40C in July.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
    To be fair, sweet FA is happening politically until its over.
    Indeed she is arguably doing a very serious job here. King Chas looks a bit nonplussed. Who wouldn’t be. He’s an old man set in his bossy ways who suddenly has a globally important job. He needs moral support

    The PM is right to aid him

  • Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
    Its the 21st century, she can work from Edinburgh, Belfast & Cardiff, not just London.

    As much as the news media have forgotten there's a war going on, I doubt the PM has and I expect she's still talking to Zelensky and Biden extremely frequently and can do so not just from Downing Street.

    If the war is won then next year the economic outlook could start to look quite different.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721

    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    I know he’s not to everyone’s taste but Guy Verhofstadt actually has a vision for Europe, and it is one that consistently includes moral clarity on the biggest long term threat to the continent.

    https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1568496749962199040?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    I've long respected his clarity. He has not been afraid to criticise the EU on a range of matters, albeit from a different direction to those who want it to be less encompassing, and does not disguise his preferred goal one bit.
    He's found himself a niche as a parody of a eurocrat. Like Katie Hopkins - they've stopped trying to convince anyone new, they just do the greatest hits.
    He is hugely more intelligent, nuanced, and willing to challenge the assumptions of his ideological stable mates than the likes of Katie Hopkins. He is also an elected politician and always has been. A Eurocrat is a civil servant.

  • DynamoDynamo Posts: 651
    edited September 10

    TimS said:

    Political Twitter may be about to discover what a day collar is, and I for one think this is exactly the kind of distraction we need after the last few days

    https://twitter.com/rmcunliffe/status/1568713130028716032?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    Even if it's Just A Lovely Necklace, how does she stop wearing it without people pointing and giggling?
    That would only be for a short while though. But I think she will continue to wear it. It will be like the Merkel quadrilateral or the Trump hand-triangle.

    There may be much more to that necklace than BDSM. It could be an amulet or talisman.

    See the Apprentice Pillar lectern that was used to announce her victory in the leadership election and then was used (or one of a similar design was) outside No10 a few hours after her predecessor had stood on the same spot before a standard lectern.

    image
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


    I didn't know bondage jewellery was a thing before this, but I think I'd still be surprised to find out that there was a bondage formal daywear collection. I mean she may like the dress because she's kinky, but I still don't think it's a kinky dress.
    Trust me - fnarr - it’s a kinky dress

    It’s bondage-motif daywear for a sub expressing herself in a vanilla world
    According to the DM it's from Karen Millen: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11065525/Liz-Truss-dedicated-follower-UK-fashion-Just-like-idol-Margaret-Thatcher.html - that ain't a bondage brand afaik.

    Liz Truss has got nice legs - pity she doesn't comport herself well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,244

    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    I know he’s not to everyone’s taste but Guy Verhofstadt actually has a vision for Europe, and it is one that consistently includes moral clarity on the biggest long term threat to the continent.

    https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1568496749962199040?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    I've long respected his clarity. He has not been afraid to criticise the EU on a range of matters, albeit from a different direction to those who want it to be less encompassing, and does not disguise his preferred goal one bit.
    He's found himself a niche as a parody of a eurocrat. Like Katie Hopkins - they've stopped trying to convince anyone new, they just do the greatest hits.
    On the contrary he hasn't stopped trying to convince anyone, that's why he has criticised the EU when he thinks it should go further on things for example.
  • DynamoDynamo Posts: 651
    Foxy said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
    No, I think it is just localised to his hands. His plethora face looks normal for someone who has spent a lot of time in the sun. Gout is rarely more than 1 joint at a time, and exquisitely painful.

    I think some arthritis is most likely.
    Dactylitis caused by congenital syphilis?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Leon said:

    I DEMAND MONEY

    Gotta be 'off topic' surely?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


    I didn't know bondage jewellery was a thing before this, but I think I'd still be surprised to find out that there was a bondage formal daywear collection. I mean she may like the dress because she's kinky, but I still don't think it's a kinky dress.
    Trust me - fnarr - it’s a kinky dress

    It’s bondage-motif daywear for a sub expressing herself in a vanilla world
    According to the DM it's from Karen Millen: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11065525/Liz-Truss-dedicated-follower-UK-fashion-Just-like-idol-Margaret-Thatcher.html - that ain't a bondage brand afaik.

    Liz Truss has got nice legs - pity she doesn't comport herself well.
    It’s a mainstream designer incorporating BDSM motifs and stylings, and thereby attracting fetlifers such as Truss

    I hope Truss doesn’t suffer for her sexual honesty. It’s quite refreshing to have an unashamed kinkster in number 10
  • FossFoss Posts: 565
    edited September 10
    .

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
    Its the 21st century, she can work from Edinburgh, Belfast & Cardiff, not just London.

    As much as the news media have forgotten there's a war going on, I doubt the PM has and I expect she's still talking to Zelensky and Biden extremely frequently and can do so not just from Downing Street.

    If the war is won then next year the economic outlook could start to look quite different.
    Ignoring everything else, it’s very likely the Queen's death has given us a second quarter of negative growth (after the Jubilee's effect on Q2) and thus technically a Royal Recession.

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    I know he’s not to everyone’s taste but Guy Verhofstadt actually has a vision for Europe, and it is one that consistently includes moral clarity on the biggest long term threat to the continent.

    https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1568496749962199040?s=21&t=3qeSSEjRZLtzfNa5ogyOVg

    I've long respected his clarity. He has not been afraid to criticise the EU on a range of matters, albeit from a different direction to those who want it to be less encompassing, and does not disguise his preferred goal one bit.
    He's found himself a niche as a parody of a eurocrat. Like Katie Hopkins - they've stopped trying to convince anyone new, they just do the greatest hits.
    On the contrary he hasn't stopped trying to convince anyone, that's why he has criticised the EU when he thinks it should go further on things for example.
    Doing the hits. It's a living.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,025
    edited September 10
    biggles said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    biggles said:

    biggles said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    GIN1138 said:
    Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
    Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?

    Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
    In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
    Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do

    Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed

    Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding

    But the new King is under intense pressure
    I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
    No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
    Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
    You also need a soupçon of charisma
    Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
    Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
    Hmmm. There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.

    7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
    I’m a royalist but the TV images are not good. He looks irritable, querulous and bossy in a bad way. A small man in big shoes

    But I agree it is just 7 seconds
    Honestly. Twitter sometimes! (Well, Twitter most of the time…) I watched the whole thing and saw it in context. It was fine. He’d just signed a couple of them and moved things around himself because the ornaments were in the way. In context and not cut into a 5 second clip, it was nothing.

    I saw it live and spotted it live, and felt uncomfortable watching it. But I didn't say anything at the time because he's just lost his mother and this is all a bit overwhelming, but it was very poor behaviour.

    If it wasn't for the fact that he's on the TV camera within 48 hours of his mother dying, because of her dying, I'd be a lot less sympathetic to that sort of behaviour. It was rude.
    Nah he was speaking to an equerry who should should have spotted it. And frankly it never should been an issue in the first place. The only mistake was to forget he was on tv.

    Fuck off. Do you think you should behave differently to other people depending whether you think whether you are observed or not?
    Very mature. Straight to swearing and insults. Who has the bad manners?

    The point, which someone with an IQ over 80 would understand, is that an equerry won’t be offended by being ordered in that way. They get much worse in their other jobs*. I was obviously then just flagging that unfortunately the country is filled with inexperienced idiots like you who won’t know that, so it’s worth not doing it on tv.

    *To fill in the gap for you, it’s a military post.
    The chap who tweeted it:


    If that's the best satire they've got - short videos edited to mislead, then we have another 250 years of monarchy coming.

    It's up there with 'Liz Truss is a flip-flopper because she changed her opinions between the ages of 19 and 47.'

    King Charles has a lot of goodwill in the bank - such as from the 950k people who have been supported by the Prince's Trust since he founded it in 1976.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,002
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
    To be fair, sweet FA is happening politically until its over.
    Correct. The Special Financial Statement will take place on 21 Sept and things will move forward then.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    Regarding Truss going on tour with Charles, I feel like he probably wants an opportunity to lay down the law and fill her head with envirobollocks. To which her response will be firm and frank hopefully.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093

    Regarding Truss going on tour with Charles, I feel like he probably wants an opportunity to lay down the law and fill her head with envirobollocks. To which her response will be firm and frank hopefully.

    Interesting. I read it as she is desperate to be on his coat tails to establish herself with a sceptical public.

  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,958


    The Special Financial Statement

    It's not my favourite Mourinho nickname, but I suppose it gets the job done.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,934

    Regarding Truss going on tour with Charles, I feel like he probably wants an opportunity to lay down the law and fill her head with envirobollocks. To which her response will be firm and frank hopefully.

    Maybe they'll come up with a joint plan to build scaled-up Poundburys all over the country.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    What’s more, these clueless fucking blue tick morons STILL haven’t noticed the dress she wore the same time as the Necklace


    I didn't know bondage jewellery was a thing before this, but I think I'd still be surprised to find out that there was a bondage formal daywear collection. I mean she may like the dress because she's kinky, but I still don't think it's a kinky dress.
    Trust me - fnarr - it’s a kinky dress

    It’s bondage-motif daywear for a sub expressing herself in a vanilla world
    According to the DM it's from Karen Millen: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11065525/Liz-Truss-dedicated-follower-UK-fashion-Just-like-idol-Margaret-Thatcher.html - that ain't a bondage brand afaik.

    Liz Truss has got nice legs - pity she doesn't comport herself well.
    It’s a mainstream designer incorporating BDSM motifs and stylings, and thereby attracting fetlifers such as Truss

    I hope Truss doesn’t suffer for her sexual honesty.
    Unless she wants to.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,102
    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
    I won't be opining on how healthy I think he looks but I would point out his parents lived to 99 and 96 so that bodes well.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648

    Regarding Truss going on tour with Charles, I feel like he probably wants an opportunity to lay down the law and fill her head with envirobollocks. To which her response will be firm and frank hopefully.

    Interesting. I read it as she is desperate to be on his coat tails to establish herself with a sceptical public.

    I think its all probably being suggested by the accession council
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Dynamo said:

    Foxy said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Likewise, who else apart from the Queen achieved 20th century icon-hood?

    Chaplin, Monroe, Beatles
    Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Guevara, De Gaulle, Thatcher, Reagan, Picasso, Einstein, Diana?

    Who else?

    Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.

    For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
    James Dean, maybe.
    Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.

    Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
    Madonna. Salvador Dali. Mother Theresa of Calcutta.
    Pele. Jagger. Michael Caine. Joan Collins.
    kle4 said:

    @Keir_Starmer
    It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.

    I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.


    image

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209

    Anyone on finger watch?
    What’s the definitive on those fingers?
    I first noticed them as child, looking at photos from his wedding to Diana.

    I think Andrew is similarly ensausaged.

    Where do they come from?
    Is it the Glucksberg inheritance?

    They are really odd.



    It may account why he wanted someone else to move the inkwell. It would have been embarrassing to drop it.
    What's your diagnosis doc?

    To me (non-medical) it looks like fluid retention? Given the rosacea we see in his face I wonder how much he drinks? To me he has the look of a heavy drinker (brandy? Port?)

    Fluid retention, hypertension and possible periodic gout perhaps? I'm not sure his reign will be a long one...
    No, I think it is just localised to his hands. His plethora face looks normal for someone who has spent a lot of time in the sun. Gout is rarely more than 1 joint at a time, and exquisitely painful.

    I think some arthritis is most likely.
    Dactylitis caused by congenital syphilis?
    Gotta say kids this seems distasteful to me. He has just lost his mother.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 30,018

    Regarding Truss going on tour with Charles, I feel like he probably wants an opportunity to lay down the law and fill her head with envirobollocks. To which her response will be firm and frank hopefully.

    Maybe they'll come up with a joint plan to build scaled-up Poundburys all over the country.
    It is entertaining how everyone is quite certain of why she is doing this. Each with their own reason.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493

    Regarding Truss going on tour with Charles, I feel like he probably wants an opportunity to lay down the law and fill her head with envirobollocks. To which her response will be firm and frank hopefully.

    Maybe they'll come up with a joint plan to build scaled-up Poundburys all over the country.
    That, I'd quite like. I agree with him on most of his stuff on architecture - yes Poundbury is a little contrived, but most people would prefer to live there than most contemporaneous towns.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,934
    @wartranslated
    Ramzan Kadyrov in his late night audio address on Telegram says that “10,000 will enter soon and we will reach Odesa”, while struggling to pronounce “Balakliia”, calling it and other Kharkiv settlements “interesting places”.

    Says he will be speaking to “Ministry of Defeat if they do not make conclusions soon”.


    https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1568724999447670784
  • CookieCookie Posts: 7,766
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss will accompany Charles & Camilla on UK tour next week: Edinburgh Monday, Tuesday Belfast & Wales Friday “to support king” at “significant moment of national mourning”, No. 10 says.

    Thanks goodness it's not BoZo

    All that bleating about a full in-tray but Liz Truss can afford to take her second week off to tour the country with the new king and queen.
    To be fair, sweet FA is happening politically until its over.
    Indeed she is arguably doing a very serious job here. King Chas looks a bit nonplussed. Who wouldn’t be. He’s an old man set in his bossy ways who suddenly has a globally important job. He needs moral support

    The PM is right to aid him

    I wonder if he has ever had advice from anyone at least slightly sceptical of a king's place in the world?
This discussion has been closed.