Cicero said:

Casino_Royale said:

Andy_JS said:

"The £6bn tunnel that could link Europe to Africa by 2030
After 100 years, a rail crossing between Spain and Morocco could finally come to fruition"

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/underwater-tunnel-link-spain-to-morocco-by-2030/

Not only will that never happen (the business case won't stack up and the politics would never allow it, it would be a huge conduit for migration into Europe) but they'd struggle to even approve and finance it by 2030 even if they wanted to, yet alone build it.

It would take at least 8 years to build and commission, and probably more like 10.

Meanwhile,in China such a tunnel could be designed and built within 3-4 years. Africa is going to be the fastest growing economic region over the next generation...

Andy_JS said:

bondegezou said:

Tres said:

Andy_JS said:

CatMan said:

Is their a website somewhere with a list of when we can expect the results? I'm assuming the London Mayor one will be massively delayed as it always is and won't announce until Saturday.

This is the Press Association page, but they haven't updated it like they said they would, by the end of April.

https://election.pressassociation.com/declaration-times/

They are not even going to start counting the London results until 9am on Saturday.

Previously, the London count used scanning machines, but with the switch to FPTP, they're switching the counting to by hand, the old fashioned way. AIUI.

This doesn't explain the Saturday counting. Just thought I'd mention it.

I remember the first time London used scanning machines in about 2004. It was a total fiasco, with the results taking much longer than they did previously with hand-counting.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

kyf_100 said:

kle4 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Cyclefree said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Hah. In Adam Zamoyski’s Napoleon he talks about Napoleon’s attitude to religion (about which bonaparte cared a lot: he was a deist)

Napoleon deeply criticised the French Revolution because it took away the “sense of the numinous”. Those are the words Zamoyski uses

This actually reinforces something I’ve been thinking for a while. I know this will provoke more skeptical and materialist PB-ers, but for a long time I’ve thought I am actually a reincarnation of Napoleon Bonaparte. And I am increasingly sure it is true, given the plentiful evidence, which I surely don’t need to adduce here

Have you ever felt the urge to conquer mainland Europe? If so, you might be on to something.

I was born on the same day as Napoleon. Is that simply coincidence? Or something more than that? You decide. It’s your call

But when you add that in, then it all looks a lot more ambiguous doesn’t it?

There will always be nay sayers that I can never convince. I pay them no heed

My son was born on the same day as Napoleon's death, 177 years later, and - unlike you - is directly descended from him. And he doesn't talk batshit nonsense either.

You can fight it out with him, if you want.

Considering the little turd was responsible for tens of thousands of untimely deaths due to his insatiable lust for personal aggrandisement (Napoleon, not your son), I fail to see what there is to be particularly proud of.

If it was long enough ago killing lots of people becomes a point of pride.

I think with napoleon the question is, would the alternative have been any better?

By modern standards he's a dictator and a fascist, by the standards of the time he was a reformist and a radical.

The British like to think of themselves as always fighting for liberty against fascists and dictators.

This does not survive even a moment's scrutiny.

Let's take Nelson. When the Neapolitans rose up against the Bourbon Kings, inspired by Napoleon, and declared the Parthenopean Republic, it was Nelson who helped quash the rebellion - brutally. Indeed, he boasted about putting it down as savagely as the Irish rebels had been put down in the Wolfe Tone-led rebellion just beforehand. The British were allying themselves with Bourbon monarchs - who were some of the most useless monarchs around.

Like everyone the British fought for their own self interest. Since the goal of British foreign policy was generally to prevent the emergence of a dominant power in continental Europe, this often involved us fighting powerful bullies like Napoleon. But since the British also ran the largest empire in the world, an inherently coercive exercise, the idea that we only fought for liberty doesn't survive even a moment's scrutiny.

MattW said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I had a gruelling evening yesterday. I'd decided to do a big walk. I stopped after 36km in quite a big town to try to find a room about 10km on

I found one 12km away and booked, but got no confirmation. I'd run out of supplies (beer) and went to three supermarkets. They were all closed and not opening until 5pm, I got to the third one at 4:30

I had to press on without beer, not knowing if I had a room booked. I'd walked about 2km more when I got a message from the host asking me to be there before 8pm

I replied no problem, thinking I'd be there by 7. Five minutes later I was officially diverted. They were doing major works on the canal I'd been walking by. I followed the diversion, and it seemed to be an extra km or two on the route. No problem

Then I lost the route.. the signs are set up for people going the right way, not oddballs like me walking to France. But Google maps told me that I was still on a path, heading for a road that would join me back to the official route

Then the path ended. It carried on on Google, but I'd reached the middle of a side of a vast field with some young crops growing in it. I couldn't follow the Google path, straight through the field, but I had to carry on, I had to be there by 8

I ended up having to walk around four fields, and walk through the brambles and climb over the irrigation channels between them. I eventually got back to the road, still with 10km to go, and two and a half hours until eight

I knew I could do it, but I was damned thirsty and still had a hill to climb. I got over the 100m hill and thought I was basically done; 5km to go and an hour and a half to get there

Then the heavens opened, quite violently, and the wind got strong. I had my little umbrella up but couldn't stop the rain from hammering ìnto the back of my legs

Nor could I do anything about the dirty, huge splash from the rain covering my jeans from the knee down in filth

I arrived at the hostel with half an hour to spare. The host was shocked to see me; he was sure I'd have given up. But my room was available, he gave me perfect dinner (chicken soup, then lentil and chorizo stew), and did my washing, all for 40€

Fantastic. You have a gift for vivid self-reportage!

"Then the path ended. It carried on on Google, but I'd reached the middle of a side of a vast field with some young crops growing in it. I couldn't follow the Google path, straight through the field, but I had to carry on, I had to be there by 8"

That's an interesting comparator.

Does the landowner have a duty exist to maintain PROWs across fields in France?

megasaur said:

MattW said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I had a gruelling evening yesterday. I'd decided to do a big walk. I stopped after 36km in quite a big town to try to find a room about 10km on

I found one 12km away and booked, but got no confirmation. I'd run out of supplies (beer) and went to three supermarkets. They were all closed and not opening until 5pm, I got to the third one at 4:30

I had to press on without beer, not knowing if I had a room booked. I'd walked about 2km more when I got a message from the host asking me to be there before 8pm

I replied no problem, thinking I'd be there by 7. Five minutes later I was officially diverted. They were doing major works on the canal I'd been walking by. I followed the diversion, and it seemed to be an extra km or two on the route. No problem

Then I lost the route.. the signs are set up for people going the right way, not oddballs like me walking to France. But Google maps told me that I was still on a path, heading for a road that would join me back to the official route

Then the path ended. It carried on on Google, but I'd reached the middle of a side of a vast field with some young crops growing in it. I couldn't follow the Google path, straight through the field, but I had to carry on, I had to be there by 8

I ended up having to walk around four fields, and walk through the brambles and climb over the irrigation channels between them. I eventually got back to the road, still with 10km to go, and two and a half hours until eight

I knew I could do it, but I was damned thirsty and still had a hill to climb. I got over the 100m hill and thought I was basically done; 5km to go and an hour and a half to get there

Then the heavens opened, quite violently, and the wind got strong. I had my little umbrella up but couldn't stop the rain from hammering ìnto the back of my legs

Nor could I do anything about the dirty, huge splash from the rain covering my jeans from the knee down in filth

I arrived at the hostel with half an hour to spare. The host was shocked to see me; he was sure I'd have given up. But my room was available, he gave me perfect dinner (chicken soup, then lentil and chorizo stew), and did my washing, all for 40€

Fantastic. You have a gift for vivid self-reportage!

"Then the path ended. It carried on on Google, but I'd reached the middle of a side of a vast field with some young crops growing in it. I couldn't follow the Google path, straight through the field, but I had to carry on, I had to be there by 8"

That's an interesting comparator.

Does the landowner have a duty exist to maintain PROWs across fields in France?

It's on Google maps -> it's a PROW is a bold leap

Heathener said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

kle4 said:

RobD said:

nico679 said:

Absolutely disgraceful and shameful efforts by the Tories in the West Midlands .

Street deserves to lose for being part of this last minute campaign to discredit his opponent . The Labour candidate already fulfills the criteria to stand regardless of where he lives because of his business interests in the area .

He’s a carpetbagger?

The allegation seems to be that he is an unlawful carpetbagger, which is a very different accusation if true.

My brother knows Andy Street a little and describes him as ‘a weasel’ and with ‘a very nasty piece of work as partner’.

And, noooooo, that’s doesn’t mean my bro’ is being homophobic. He’s gay.

I've had a good laugh reading your posts on here tonight. It's the only way one can now interpret them. And they're truly hilarious.

More please.

This place works best when views are aired, considered, and politely rebutted if it’s felt right to.

Conversely it is at its worst when there is mere vilification, which reflects badly on someone like you. It’s okay not to share my views but it’s not okay to vilify them, especially with casual sexism frequently thrown in. And as you know full well, I embrace ‘people of colour’ in this country. It’s what I love about this nation. It’s the likes of Sunak, Badenoch, Braverman who are showing downright nasty policies that are excluding minorities and those from other countries less fortunate than their privileged selves.

I do think some on the right on this forum are becoming more fanciful in their views and less in touch with the public mood. The litmus test of that might may not be today (because they’re locals) but it’s coming.

A year ago on here I was frequently ridiculed for suggesting an outright Labour majority was almost nailed on. Now it’s the de facto position of just about everyone here.

Scott_xP said:

@lara_spirit
Labour lead at 26 points in this week's YouGov poll for The Times

CON 18 (-2)
LAB 44 (-1)
LIB DEM 10 (+1)
REF UK 15 (+2)
GRN 8 (+1)

Fieldwork 30 April - 1 May

Casino_Royale said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

kyf_100 said:

kle4 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Cyclefree said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Hah. In Adam Zamoyski’s Napoleon he talks about Napoleon’s attitude to religion (about which bonaparte cared a lot: he was a deist)

Napoleon deeply criticised the French Revolution because it took away the “sense of the numinous”. Those are the words Zamoyski uses

This actually reinforces something I’ve been thinking for a while. I know this will provoke more skeptical and materialist PB-ers, but for a long time I’ve thought I am actually a reincarnation of Napoleon Bonaparte. And I am increasingly sure it is true, given the plentiful evidence, which I surely don’t need to adduce here

Have you ever felt the urge to conquer mainland Europe? If so, you might be on to something.

I was born on the same day as Napoleon. Is that simply coincidence? Or something more than that? You decide. It’s your call

But when you add that in, then it all looks a lot more ambiguous doesn’t it?

There will always be nay sayers that I can never convince. I pay them no heed

My son was born on the same day as Napoleon's death, 177 years later, and - unlike you - is directly descended from him. And he doesn't talk batshit nonsense either.

You can fight it out with him, if you want.

Considering the little turd was responsible for tens of thousands of untimely deaths due to his insatiable lust for personal aggrandisement (Napoleon, not your son), I fail to see what there is to be particularly proud of.

If it was long enough ago killing lots of people becomes a point of pride.

I think with napoleon the question is, would the alternative have been any better?

By modern standards he's a dictator and a fascist, by the standards of the time he was a reformist and a radical.

The British like to think of themselves as always fighting for liberty against fascists and dictators.

This does not survive even a moment's scrutiny.

Let's take Nelson. When the Neapolitans rose up against the Bourbon Kings, inspired by Napoleon, and declared the Parthenopean Republic, it was Nelson who helped quash the rebellion - brutally. Indeed, he boasted about putting it down as savagely as the Irish rebels had been put down in the Wolfe Tone-led rebellion just beforehand. The British were allying themselves with Bourbon monarchs - who were some of the most useless monarchs around.

Like everyone the British fought for their own self interest. Since the goal of British foreign policy was generally to prevent the emergence of a dominant power in continental Europe, this often involved us fighting powerful bullies like Napoleon. But since the British also ran the largest empire in the world, an inherently coercive exercise, the idea that we only fought for liberty doesn't survive even a moment's scrutiny.

Essentially true, but we did sometimes do so and ours was virtually the only Empire with a form of parliamentary accountability and such issues were at least debated.

NEW THREAD

Scott_xP said:

wooliedyed said:

Scott_xP said:

@lara_spirit
Labour lead at 26 points in this week's YouGov poll for The Times

CON 18 (-2)
LAB 44 (-1)
LIB DEM 10 (+1)
REF UK 15 (+2)
GRN 8 (+1)

Fieldwork 30 April - 1 May

Tories will be glad this gets somewhat lost in the maelstrom. Crossover incoming.

indeed

Theuniondivvie said:

Hope @dieworkwear breaks down this look. As one of the replies says Rudy looks like he's wearing Trump’s skin.



https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1785622050649911404