"What a time to be alive with a POTUS dropping the F bomb so publicly."
I don't think sexual swearwords are the taboos they used to be. Taboos have changed.
In the Middle Ages, the worst curse-words were religious, because everyone was terrified that using them could send whole cities to burn in eternity. In the Victorian period the worst such words were sexual, because of social neuroses about sex. Now they are racial, because white Americans are crippled by guilt that a large part of their country was founded on slavery and all of it on the dispossession of its existing inhabitants (like every other state in history).
Had Trump dropped the N-bomb rather than the F-bomb, I imagine the reaction would have been much more explosive.
In fact of course having these hangups is hugely damaging - they prevent free discussion of different viewpoints. In the Middle Ages, people were burned at the stake for trivial religious differences. In the Victorian period, women were so terrified of appearing immodest that some would die rather than discuss medical symptoms with their doctors. Our over-sensitivity about racial matters has analogous, damaging effects today.
You'd think that no matter what time period you're living in it would be unacceptable to use strong sexual swear words in front of young children. Yet that's what I hear quite often these days.
So, some on PB want to ban cousin marriages, pregnancy if you're 40+ and bad language in front of children. It seems a bit authoritarian!
The problem with cousin marriages is not the first one. You can just about get away with that. So as a one off event it maybe doesn't do enough harm to ban it, even if it really isn't a good idea.
The problems really start in the second generation, and the third...
Bring on the dueling banjos.
Dueling sitars would be more appropriate.
It might be a backwoods things in America but here it would be found in the inner cities.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Is the only reason you don't want to ban pregnancy at 40 because you think it will be difficult to enforce?!
I think most people wouldn't ban it because it would be an unacceptable infringement on people's liberty.
I didn't say I wanted to ban cousin marriage.
You seemed to be making an argument against banning cousin marriage in the basis of it being inconsistent to allow the greater risk of having a baby at age 40.
I was pointing out that doing something that was partly useful can be with doing even if it's not possible to do everything that you might want to do if your only concern was minimising the risk of genetic abnormalities.
The reason that banning pregnancy at age 40 would be difficult is in part previously because most* people would see it as an unacceptable infringement on liberty. Is banking cousin marriage similarly an unacceptable infringement on liberty? Is it that much different to banning marriage to a sibling?
* Including myself, although I'm sad that it's necessary to say so, to avoid what might otherwise be an interesting discussion speaking off on an irrelevant tangent.
More people should be more upset that another country has been lost to authoritarianism. Democracy and freedom is on the back foot and most people seem oblivious.
"What a time to be alive with a POTUS dropping the F bomb so publicly."
I don't think sexual swearwords are the taboos they used to be. Taboos have changed.
In the Middle Ages, the worst curse-words were religious, because everyone was terrified that using them could send whole cities to burn in eternity. In the Victorian period the worst such words were sexual, because of social neuroses about sex. Now they are racial, because white Americans are crippled by guilt that a large part of their country was founded on slavery and all of it on the dispossession of its existing inhabitants (like every other state in history).
Had Trump dropped the N-bomb rather than the F-bomb, I imagine the reaction would have been much more explosive.
In fact of course having these hangups is hugely damaging - they prevent free discussion of different viewpoints. In the Middle Ages, people were burned at the stake for trivial religious differences. In the Victorian period, women were so terrified of appearing immodest that some would die rather than discuss medical symptoms with their doctors. Our over-sensitivity about racial matters has analogous, damaging effects today.
You'd think that no matter what time period you're living in it would be unacceptable to use strong sexual swear words in front of young children. Yet that's what I hear quite often these days.
So, some on PB want to ban cousin marriages, pregnancy if you're 40+ and bad language in front of children. It seems a bit authoritarian!
Have you got an argument that is pro first cousin marriage?
I don't have to be pro something to not want it banned. We should err on the side of letting people make their own choices and letting them do what they want. There are plenty of more dangerous things we don't ban (e.g. horseriding to refer back to yesterday's conversation).
"What a time to be alive with a POTUS dropping the F bomb so publicly."
I don't think sexual swearwords are the taboos they used to be. Taboos have changed.
In the Middle Ages, the worst curse-words were religious, because everyone was terrified that using them could send whole cities to burn in eternity. In the Victorian period the worst such words were sexual, because of social neuroses about sex. Now they are racial, because white Americans are crippled by guilt that a large part of their country was founded on slavery and all of it on the dispossession of its existing inhabitants (like every other state in history).
Had Trump dropped the N-bomb rather than the F-bomb, I imagine the reaction would have been much more explosive.
In fact of course having these hangups is hugely damaging - they prevent free discussion of different viewpoints. In the Middle Ages, people were burned at the stake for trivial religious differences. In the Victorian period, women were so terrified of appearing immodest that some would die rather than discuss medical symptoms with their doctors. Our over-sensitivity about racial matters has analogous, damaging effects today.
You'd think that no matter what time period you're living in it would be unacceptable to use strong sexual swear words in front of young children. Yet that's what I hear quite often these days.
So, some on PB want to ban cousin marriages, pregnancy if you're 40+ and bad language in front of children. It seems a bit authoritarian!
Have you got an argument that is pro first cousin marriage?
"What a time to be alive with a POTUS dropping the F bomb so publicly."
I don't think sexual swearwords are the taboos they used to be. Taboos have changed.
In the Middle Ages, the worst curse-words were religious, because everyone was terrified that using them could send whole cities to burn in eternity. In the Victorian period the worst such words were sexual, because of social neuroses about sex. Now they are racial, because white Americans are crippled by guilt that a large part of their country was founded on slavery and all of it on the dispossession of its existing inhabitants (like every other state in history).
Had Trump dropped the N-bomb rather than the F-bomb, I imagine the reaction would have been much more explosive.
In fact of course having these hangups is hugely damaging - they prevent free discussion of different viewpoints. In the Middle Ages, people were burned at the stake for trivial religious differences. In the Victorian period, women were so terrified of appearing immodest that some would die rather than discuss medical symptoms with their doctors. Our over-sensitivity about racial matters has analogous, damaging effects today.
You'd think that no matter what time period you're living in it would be unacceptable to use strong sexual swear words in front of young children. Yet that's what I hear quite often these days.
So, some on PB want to ban cousin marriages, pregnancy if you're 40+ and bad language in front of children. It seems a bit authoritarian!
The problem with cousin marriages is not the first one. You can just about get away with that. So as a one off event it maybe doesn't do enough harm to ban it, even if it really isn't a good idea.
The problems really start in the second generation, and the third...
Bring on the dueling banjos.
Dueling sitars would be more appropriate.
It might be a backwoods things in America but here it would be found in the inner cities.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
We should be very clear that Trump is close to abandoning Ukraine. If Europe allows them to be defeated and occupied, Russia will eventually turn their military/industrial base against us.
It is already fighting a hybrid war of subversion, cyberattacks and the full panoply of KGB originated tricks.
A Russia which possessed Ukraine would be a far more formidable adversary, though.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
Tip: if you arrive at Headingley cricket ground with a laptop, you can leave it at the nearby Boundary Hotel for £5. The ground doesn't allow laptops because they think you can place bets marginally faster than on a phone. Is this really true?!
Perhaps a grain of truth. Not due to the connectivity, but due to how shite mobile website design is.
More likely, they simply can't practically ban phones.
Could easily be true. Mate of mine (I know) specialises in detection software in particular people attend live events and place bets from court/pitchside.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
Make it a confidence vote as Major did with Maastricht IiRC
"Minister defends welfare cuts, saying number receiving Pip rising by 1,000 a day Pat McFadden says number of people on benefit is due to double over decade, as more than 100 Labour MPs try to pause cuts"
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
"The US military strikes on 3 of Iran’s nuclear facilities did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment described by 4 people briefed on it."
It’s amazing the amount of people out there who actually are happy, if this indeed the case, just to own Trump.
Not really. There are just as many, likely far more, who assume it's a success just because it was Trump.
The reality is that we don't know either way.
What's for sure is that under the Obama deal which Trump junked, Iran stopped adding more centrifuges, and dramatically increased their number thereafter.
The raid was a gamble. It might pay off; it might end up with Iran getting a bomb. We don't yet know how it plays out.
Our opinion of Trump really doesn't affect the outcome.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
"The US military strikes on 3 of Iran’s nuclear facilities did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment described by 4 people briefed on it."
It’s amazing the amount of people out there who actually are happy, if this indeed the case, just to own Trump.
Not really. There are just as many, likely far more, who assume it's a success just because it was Trump.
The reality is that we don't know either way.
What's for sure is that under the Obama deal which Trump junked, Iran stopped adding more centrifuges, and dramatically increased their number thereafter.
The raid was a gamble. It might pay off; it might end up with Iran getting a bomb. We don't yet know how it plays out.
Our opinion of Trump really doesn't affect the outcome.
More importantly was I right about the test or was I right about the test ?
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
I predict a compromise. There won't be a government defeat, dissolution, resignation of leader, or a complete withdrawal of the proposal. There's a fudge on the way.
"The US military strikes on 3 of Iran’s nuclear facilities did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment described by 4 people briefed on it."
It’s amazing the amount of people out there who actually are happy, if this indeed the case, just to own Trump.
Not really. There are just as many, likely far more, who assume it's a success just because it was Trump.
The reality is that we don't know either way.
What's for sure is that under the Obama deal which Trump junked, Iran stopped adding more centrifuges, and dramatically increased their number thereafter.
The raid was a gamble. It might pay off; it might end up with Iran getting a bomb. We don't yet know how it plays out.
Our opinion of Trump really doesn't affect the outcome.
More importantly was I right about the test or was I right about the test ?
England overcame massive odds, including your jinx.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
Assumes facts not yet in evidence.
Such as.
How this turns out. He might have played a blinder; he might have precipitated a nuclear armed Iran.
Tip: if you arrive at Headingley cricket ground with a laptop, you can leave it at the nearby Boundary Hotel for £5. The ground doesn't allow laptops because they think you can place bets marginally faster than on a phone. Is this really true?!
Perhaps a grain of truth. Not due to the connectivity, but due to how shite mobile website design is.
More likely, they simply can't practically ban phones.
Could easily be true. Mate of mine (I know) specialises in detection software in particular people attend live events and place bets from court/pitchside.
It's hard to know what can possibly be improper as such about placing bets in real time at live events in a world where markets offer a trillion in play opportunities. There is no inside information not available to the market maker. What's the problem?
"What a time to be alive with a POTUS dropping the F bomb so publicly."
I don't think sexual swearwords are the taboos they used to be. Taboos have changed.
In the Middle Ages, the worst curse-words were religious, because everyone was terrified that using them could send whole cities to burn in eternity. In the Victorian period the worst such words were sexual, because of social neuroses about sex. Now they are racial, because white Americans are crippled by guilt that a large part of their country was founded on slavery and all of it on the dispossession of its existing inhabitants (like every other state in history).
Had Trump dropped the N-bomb rather than the F-bomb, I imagine the reaction would have been much more explosive.
In fact of course having these hangups is hugely damaging - they prevent free discussion of different viewpoints. In the Middle Ages, people were burned at the stake for trivial religious differences. In the Victorian period, women were so terrified of appearing immodest that some would die rather than discuss medical symptoms with their doctors. Our over-sensitivity about racial matters has analogous, damaging effects today.
You'd think that no matter what time period you're living in it would be unacceptable to use strong sexual swear words in front of young children. Yet that's what I hear quite often these days.
So, some on PB want to ban cousin marriages, pregnancy if you're 40+ and bad language in front of children. It seems a bit authoritarian!
The problem with cousin marriages is not the first one. You can just about get away with that. So as a one off event it maybe doesn't do enough harm to ban it, even if it really isn't a good idea.
The problems really start in the second generation, and the third...
Bring on the dueling banjos.
Dueling sitars would be more appropriate.
It might be a backwoods things in America but here it would be found in the inner cities.
"The US military strikes on 3 of Iran’s nuclear facilities did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment described by 4 people briefed on it."
It’s amazing the amount of people out there who actually are happy, if this indeed the case, just to own Trump.
Not really. There are just as many, likely far more, who assume it's a success just because it was Trump.
The reality is that we don't know either way.
What's for sure is that under the Obama deal which Trump junked, Iran stopped adding more centrifuges, and dramatically increased their number thereafter.
The raid was a gamble. It might pay off; it might end up with Iran getting a bomb. We don't yet know how it plays out.
Our opinion of Trump really doesn't affect the outcome.
More importantly was I right about the test or was I right about the test ?
England overcame massive odds, including your jinx.
I’m sorry but I quite admire Trump dropping the F nuke, on Israel, in public
It will be popular. And of course they deserve it
Quite. And now he should just let them run out of missiles. Sorry.
Tremendously strong man, dropping some huge bunker buster bombs on Iran and the next day saying sweary words about Israel as he walks to his helicopter.
Most US Presidents of recent times would have used the Iranian's attack on their base to go to war. I think Trump has been rather wise.
Noted. You think Trump has been rather wise.
It's the mark of a rather second rate mind not to be able to acknowledge the merit of an action (or in this case inaction) because one detests the individual who has made it. I bow to nobody in my dislike of Sir, but I have acknowledged it without hesitation when he does something praiseworthy.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
An odd yes and no thing.
He's stuck himself at centre stage. But it's not just the Middle East. He's stuck himself in the role of Global King. Now this is really quite interesting in that it was surely the route that Kings of the past took.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
Err, OK.
This isn't going to happen. Hundreds (literally) of Labour MPs seats are at stake here. Some MPs are a bit dim but they all know that an election called for no good reason four years early would wipe Labour out. And put in a bunch of unprepared clowns.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
Err, OK.
This isn't going to happen. Hundreds (literally) of Labour MPs seats are at stake here. Some MPs are a bit dim but they all know that an election called for no good reason four years early would wipe Labour out. And put in a bunch of unprepared clowns.
Tip: if you arrive at Headingley cricket ground with a laptop, you can leave it at the nearby Boundary Hotel for £5. The ground doesn't allow laptops because they think you can place bets marginally faster than on a phone. Is this really true?!
Perhaps a grain of truth. Not due to the connectivity, but due to how shite mobile website design is.
More likely, they simply can't practically ban phones.
Could easily be true. Mate of mine (I know) specialises in detection software in particular people attend live events and place bets from court/pitchside.
It's hard to know what can possibly be improper as such about placing bets in real time at live events in a world where markets offer a trillion in play opportunities. There is no inside information not available to the market maker. What's the problem?
Nothing legally but the bookies don't like it and act to prevent it.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
An odd yes and no thing.
He's stuck himself at centre stage. But it's not just the Middle East. He's stuck himself in the role of Global King. Now this is really quite interesting in that it was surely the route that Kings of the past took.
Ben Duckett played exceptionally well today, and Crawley supported him superbly
I can’t remember such a strong fourth innings start
There was a famous West Indian victory in the 80s in England which I think outdoes it. Test Match Special made the commentary available on their podcast recently when they were celebrating their anniversary.
You can watch a huge amount of vintage cricket matches on DM Mordecai's YouTube Channel, including the 1984 England v West Indies series.
Dozens of pro-Indy accounts go dark after Israeli strikes
On 12 June 2025, dozens of anonymous X (formerly Twitter) accounts advocating Scottish independence abruptly went silent.
Many had posted hundreds of times per week, often using pro-independence slogans, anti-UK messaging, and identity cues like “NHS nurse” or “Glaswegian socialist.”
Their sudden disappearance coincided with a major Israeli airstrike campaign against Iranian military and cyber infrastructure. Within days, Iran had suffered severe power outages, fuel shortages, and an internet blackout affecting 95 percent of national connectivity.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
Err, OK.
This isn't going to happen. Hundreds (literally) of Labour MPs seats are at stake here. Some MPs are a bit dim but they all know that an election called for no good reason four years early would wipe Labour out. And put in a bunch of unprepared clowns.
True, though Reform aren't the sole unprepared clowns in this situation.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
An odd yes and no thing.
He's stuck himself at centre stage. But it's not just the Middle East. He's stuck himself in the role of Global King. Now this is really quite interesting in that it was surely the route that Kings of the past took.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
It couldn't under the FTPA, now repealed, so, SFAICS, we are back in the old situation where a government that cannot get its legislative programme through parliament can and sometimes should ask the king for a dissolution even without a VONC.
It won't happen over this; firstly because there will be a fudge, secondly because it is not an important enough plank of the government programme.
If I am wrong and it goes ahead and Starmer loses, it could be enough for him to resign as PM - like Cameron after the referendum in 2016. I can't remember what the referendum was about now but it seemed important at the time.
Dozens of pro-Indy accounts go dark after Israeli strikes
On 12 June 2025, dozens of anonymous X (formerly Twitter) accounts advocating Scottish independence abruptly went silent.
Many had posted hundreds of times per week, often using pro-independence slogans, anti-UK messaging, and identity cues like “NHS nurse” or “Glaswegian socialist.”
Their sudden disappearance coincided with a major Israeli airstrike campaign against Iranian military and cyber infrastructure. Within days, Iran had suffered severe power outages, fuel shortages, and an internet blackout affecting 95 percent of national connectivity.
Ben Duckett played exceptionally well today, and Crawley supported him superbly
I can’t remember such a strong fourth innings start
There was a famous West Indian victory in the 80s in England which I think outdoes it. Test Match Special made the commentary available on their podcast recently when they were celebrating their anniversary.
You can watch a huge amount of vintage cricket matches on DM Mordecai's YouTube Channel, including the 1984 England v West Indies series.
Robelinda had a great YouTube channel for classic cricket too.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
Err, OK.
This isn't going to happen. Hundreds (literally) of Labour MPs seats are at stake here. Some MPs are a bit dim but they all know that an election called for no good reason four years early would wipe Labour out. And put in a bunch of unprepared clowns.
True, though Reform aren't the sole unprepared clowns in this situation.
Agree, but they are the unprepared clowns who would win a GE if called for no good reason tomorrow. Tories would come third or fourth.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
An odd yes and no thing.
He's stuck himself at centre stage. But it's not just the Middle East. He's stuck himself in the role of Global King. Now this is really quite interesting in that it was surely the route that Kings of the past took.
Or, as the Iranians actually called their king, 'shahenshah' or 'king of kings'.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
Err, OK.
This isn't going to happen. Hundreds (literally) of Labour MPs seats are at stake here. Some MPs are a bit dim but they all know that an election called for no good reason four years early would wipe Labour out. And put in a bunch of unprepared clowns.
Which shows how strongly they feel that they are being expected to shit on disabled people to save SKS skin and the Labour govt. Its force the issue now or lose their seats in disgrace and hated when everything finally collapses. Starmer could raise taxes and not impoverish disabled people, he's not boxed in here. He's just decided the wealthy are more important
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
“has played a blinder”
Early days, let’s see how it plays out.
The terrorist sponsoring regime 100% belligerent to Israel existence is still there, arming up, arming proxies, and enriching Uranium.
It could be opposite of what you are claiming, if what actually happened is how Israel and US not being on same page from beginning means they messed up resulting in something un clinical and barely helpful.
There’s no negotiations guaranteed as part of Trumps ceasefire. And Israel and US administrations claiming triumph for themselves - if triumph that’s actually dealt with it is not the reality, it’s actually in a less progressive got to deal with it position than 14 days ago.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
An odd yes and no thing.
He's stuck himself at centre stage. But it's not just the Middle East. He's stuck himself in the role of Global King. Now this is really quite interesting in that it was surely the route that Kings of the past took.
POTUS is de facto king of the world.
A king.
De facto, Xi now wields comparable influence.
Isn't subject to the outcome of elections next year. And is less naive. Trump says he expects the ceasefire to last indefinitely, according to NBC.
"The US military strikes on 3 of Iran’s nuclear facilities did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment described by 4 people briefed on it."
It’s amazing the amount of people out there who actually are happy, if this indeed the case, just to own Trump.
Not really. There are just as many, likely far more, who assume it's a success just because it was Trump.
The reality is that we don't know either way.
What's for sure is that under the Obama deal which Trump junked, Iran stopped adding more centrifuges, and dramatically increased their number thereafter.
The raid was a gamble. It might pay off; it might end up with Iran getting a bomb. We don't yet know how it plays out.
Our opinion of Trump really doesn't affect the outcome.
More importantly was I right about the test or was I right about the test ?
England overcame massive odds, including your jinx.
Something I read recently that amused me is that at one point the Pentagon considered turning intelligence briefings into a Fox News style report as even the already dumbed-down presentations, with lots of graphics and mentions of Trump, weren't sinking into his thick head.
One of the areas affected will be my borough, Newham, where presumably Councillor Rokhsana Fiaz, the current directly elected Mayor, will have to find a Ward to stand in next May if she wants to become leader of the new council though the number of enemies she has made within Newham Labour makes that far from certain.
Newham will revert to 66 councillors in 22 three member Wards.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Something I read recently that amused me is that at one point the Pentagon considered turning intelligence briefings into a Fox News style report as even the already dumbed-down presentations, with lots of graphics and mentions of Trump, weren't sinking into his thick head.
They sent a fleet of B2 bombers the wrong way so that he wouldn't tweet about the real raid
We should be very clear that Trump is close to abandoning Ukraine. If Europe allows them to be defeated and occupied, Russia will eventually turn their military/industrial base against us.
Europe's needs a strategy for victory that doesn't rely on any US participation.
If Trump abandons Ukraine, he also abandons any right to stop Ukraine destroying the Russian hydrocarbons industry - with the inevitable impact on US gas prices.
So Trump. In his bonkers way he has played a blinder. And ofc Israel has played him getting him to unleash the bunker busters and will be more than happy to be vented at.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
“has played a blinder”
Early days, let’s see how it plays out.
The terrorist sponsoring regime 100% belligerent to Israel existence is still there, arming up, arming proxies, and enriching Uranium.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Prohibition Is very often effective.
There are a small handful of examples where it has been noticeable ineffective, but a much larger set of situations where it has been so effective that it doesn't register.
Cousin marriage strikes me as something that shouldn't really be too controversial. There are reasonable arguments in favour of a ban and reasonable principles in favour of not creating a ban. Reasonable democracies have instituted a ban and other reasonable democracies do not.
If it were banned, I assume we're talking of banning first cousin marriages, and that still leaves second and third cousins. One of the things that's really surprised me about moving to rural Ireland is just how extensive people's knowledge about their extended families are here. I'd be surprised if that wasn't also the case for the communities where cousin marriage is more common in Britain, so it wouldn't necessarily be all that disruptive.
So it seems to be a low stakes change in the law. You'd make a modest contribution to reducing the risk of genetic defects, at the cost of a modest extension of the limitations that already exist on permitted marriages. Not much reason to get het up by anyone. Oh for a day when that would be the most contentious issue in our politics.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
How does it trigger a General Election?
If Labour takes the whip from enough rebels and they vote against him in a VONC.
But that's unlikely I think
So all these former ( now Independent ) Labour MPs are desperate for an election and a Reform government.
Err, OK.
This isn't going to happen. Hundreds (literally) of Labour MPs seats are at stake here. Some MPs are a bit dim but they all know that an election called for no good reason four years early would wipe Labour out. And put in a bunch of unprepared clowns.
We should be very clear that Trump is close to abandoning Ukraine. If Europe allows them to be defeated and occupied, Russia will eventually turn their military/industrial base against us.
Europe's needs a strategy for victory that doesn't rely on any US participation.
If Trump abandons Ukraine, he also abandons any right to stop Ukraine destroying the Russian hydrocarbons industry - with the inevitable impact on US gas prices.
Reportedly a refinery in Taganrog is ablaze tonight after a Ukrainian drone attack.
We've also seen a clutch of announcements about joint production of Ukrainian-designed drones from various European countries.
Perhaps a sign of Ukraine and its closest European allies moving on from hoping the US under Trump will help.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Of course the law can only deal with the law, but vicars, rabbis, registrars and imams for the most part are going to be following the law; and if they don't their ability to make legal marriage can be annulled by the state.
On a social level the thought for most people of marrying or having sex with one of their cousins must surely be a bit icky to put it mildly, if people really want to they can run off to another country or something - but banning it sends out a strong signal that it's not OK and sure if it's only once it's not a massive health risk but you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people with problems if it's done generation after generation.
Dozens of pro-Indy accounts go dark after Israeli strikes
On 12 June 2025, dozens of anonymous X (formerly Twitter) accounts advocating Scottish independence abruptly went silent.
Many had posted hundreds of times per week, often using pro-independence slogans, anti-UK messaging, and identity cues like “NHS nurse” or “Glaswegian socialist.”
Their sudden disappearance coincided with a major Israeli airstrike campaign against Iranian military and cyber infrastructure. Within days, Iran had suffered severe power outages, fuel shortages, and an internet blackout affecting 95 percent of national connectivity.
SCOOP: 'Big Balls' has officially left the building.
19-year-old technologist Edward Coristine, a key operative in Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) who's gone by the name "Big Balls" online, has resigned, the White House tells WIRED.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Of course the law can only deal with the law, but vicars, rabbis, registrars and imams for the most part are going to be following the law; and if they don't their ability to make legal marriage can be annulled by the state.
On a social level the thought for most people of marrying or having sex with one of their cousins must surely be a bit icky to put it mildly, if people really want to they can run off to another country or something - but banning it sends out a strong signal that it's not OK and sure if it's only once it's not a massive health risk but you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people with problems if it's done generation after generation.
Cousin marriage used to be a lot more common in Britain. Charles Darwin married a cousin.
So how did it become less prevalent in Britain, and why would most people find the idea, "a bit icky"?
Dozens of pro-Indy accounts go dark after Israeli strikes
On 12 June 2025, dozens of anonymous X (formerly Twitter) accounts advocating Scottish independence abruptly went silent.
Many had posted hundreds of times per week, often using pro-independence slogans, anti-UK messaging, and identity cues like “NHS nurse” or “Glaswegian socialist.”
Their sudden disappearance coincided with a major Israeli airstrike campaign against Iranian military and cyber infrastructure. Within days, Iran had suffered severe power outages, fuel shortages, and an internet blackout affecting 95 percent of national connectivity.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Of course the law can only deal with the law, but vicars, rabbis, registrars and imams for the most part are going to be following the law; and if they don't their ability to make legal marriage can be annulled by the state.
On a social level the thought for most people of marrying or having sex with one of their cousins must surely be a bit icky to put it mildly, if people really want to they can run off to another country or something - but banning it sends out a strong signal that it's not OK and sure if it's only once it's not a massive health risk but you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people with problems if it's done generation after generation.
I agree with OnlyLivingBoy that some people only think it's gross because it's Brown people doing it. And they are wrong. But I would have no problem with banning it. My great great aunt married her cousin, and their son was born almost blind.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Of course the law can only deal with the law, but vicars, rabbis, registrars and imams for the most part are going to be following the law; and if they don't their ability to make legal marriage can be annulled by the state.
On a social level the thought for most people of marrying or having sex with one of their cousins must surely be a bit icky to put it mildly, if people really want to they can run off to another country or something - but banning it sends out a strong signal that it's not OK and sure if it's only once it's not a massive health risk but you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people with problems if it's done generation after generation.
Cousin marriage used to be a lot more common in Britain. Charles Darwin married a cousin.
So how did it become less prevalent in Britain, and why would most people find the idea, "a bit icky"?
Because people started moving around a lot more. Easy as that, really.
McCaul: “I’ve been briefed on this plan in the past, and it was never meant to completely destroy the nuclear facilities, but rather cause significant damage. But it was always known to be a temporary setback.”
One of the areas affected will be my borough, Newham, where presumably Councillor Rokhsana Fiaz, the current directly elected Mayor, will have to find a Ward to stand in next May if she wants to become leader of the new council though the number of enemies she has made within Newham Labour makes that far from certain.
Newham will revert to 66 councillors in 22 three member Wards.
It does say that existing council mayors can continue as is.
Whereas councils with the committee system - as the island has literally just last month adopted - will be forced back to a cabinet model. Labour authoritarianism in action, again, sadly.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Prohibition Is very often effective.
There are a small handful of examples where it has been noticeable ineffective, but a much larger set of situations where it has been so effective that it doesn't register.
Cousin marriage strikes me as something that shouldn't really be too controversial. There are reasonable arguments in favour of a ban and reasonable principles in favour of not creating a ban. Reasonable democracies have instituted a ban and other reasonable democracies do not.
If it were banned, I assume we're talking of banning first cousin marriages, and that still leaves second and third cousins. One of the things that's really surprised me about moving to rural Ireland is just how extensive people's knowledge about their extended families are here. I'd be surprised if that wasn't also the case for the communities where cousin marriage is more common in Britain, so it wouldn't necessarily be all that disruptive.
So it seems to be a low stakes change in the law. You'd make a modest contribution to reducing the risk of genetic defects, at the cost of a modest extension of the limitations that already exist on permitted marriages. Not much reason to get het up by anyone. Oh for a day when that would be the most contentious issue in our politics.
You can do like Iran: discourage cousin marriage and provide genetic testing for key conditions (like thalassaemia) for couples looking to marry/conceive. That will reduce the risk of genetic defects without having to control people's lives more.
People should be well informed about risks, able to control their fertility and have access to abortion. The state shouldn't be dictating who people can marry or have kids with. Eugenics was a bad thing.
I presume we all agree that it shouldn't be allowed..
It is contra-indicated for genetic health reasons, but I don't have the same visceral reaction to it as I do with sibling incest.
And if it was a same-sex marriage, or one of the two had been sterilised, there'd be nothing to worry about in health terms either.
Having a pregnancy at 40 is also contra-indicated. The risk is probably higher. We don't ban that.
It's easier to ban cousin marriage than pregnancy at age 40, though.
Not really. You can ban civil marriage but that doesn't stop people from having a marriage ceremony and subsequently having sex. Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
Of course the law can only deal with the law, but vicars, rabbis, registrars and imams for the most part are going to be following the law; and if they don't their ability to make legal marriage can be annulled by the state.
On a social level the thought for most people of marrying or having sex with one of their cousins must surely be a bit icky to put it mildly, if people really want to they can run off to another country or something - but banning it sends out a strong signal that it's not OK and sure if it's only once it's not a massive health risk but you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people with problems if it's done generation after generation.
It's unlikely to happen generation after generation as immigrant populations generally integrate and adopt the host population's marriage and fertility patterns.
"Following the protest, 25-year-old Liam Mizrahi, of no fixed address, was charged with a racially aggravated public order offence and held on remand to appear in court on Tuesday. Lavina Richards, 37, of Elsdale Street, Hackney, was also held in custody. She is charged with two counts of assaulting an emergency worker, and will appear in court on Wednesday. Bipasha Tahsin, 21, of Pinchin Street, Tower Hamlets, and Eleanor Simmonds, 31, of no fixed address, were both charged with assaulting an emergency worker. They were bailed, and will appear in court on 8 July and 25 July respectively. Matthew Holbrook, 59, of Somerhill Road, Hove, Tom Jubert, 40, of Chippendale Street, Hackney, and Hafeza Choudhury, 28, of Berkeley Path, Luton, were charged with breaching conditions imposed under the Public Order Act and were bailed with a court date set for 21 July."
Has anyone mentioned the very early adaptation of Nineteen Eighty-four currently available on BBC4 i-player? It's fascinating in many ways, not least the prelude and the interlude.
One of the areas affected will be my borough, Newham, where presumably Councillor Rokhsana Fiaz, the current directly elected Mayor, will have to find a Ward to stand in next May if she wants to become leader of the new council though the number of enemies she has made within Newham Labour makes that far from certain.
Newham will revert to 66 councillors in 22 three member Wards.
It does say that existing council mayors can continue as is.
Whereas councils with the committee system - as the island has literally just last month adopted - will be forced back to a cabinet model. Labour authoritarianism in action, again, sadly.
I sense within the statement, however, a desire for the 13 authorities to move to a Leader/Cabinet model and while that may not happen at once, it wouldn't surprise if it happened over time. I'm not sure the current model works for either Newham or Tower Hamlets.
Comments
It might be a backwoods things in America but here it would be found in the inner cities.
Labour MPs are being warned that a major rebellion on the welfare reform Bill next week could trigger a General Election or a leadership contest, marking the "start of the end" for Keir Starmer
You seemed to be making an argument against banning cousin marriage in the basis of it being inconsistent to allow the greater risk of having a baby at age 40.
I was pointing out that doing something that was partly useful can be with doing even if it's not possible to do everything that you might want to do if your only concern was minimising the risk of genetic abnormalities.
The reason that banning pregnancy at age 40 would be difficult is in part previously because most* people would see it as an unacceptable infringement on liberty. Is banking cousin marriage similarly an unacceptable infringement on liberty? Is it that much different to banning marriage to a sibling?
* Including myself, although I'm sad that it's necessary to say so, to avoid what might otherwise be an interesting discussion speaking off on an irrelevant tangent.
Austria, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Switzerland ban it and Sweden is looking at doing the same.
But that's unlikely I think
Pat McFadden says number of people on benefit is due to double over decade, as more than 100 Labour MPs try to pause cuts"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/24/pat-mcfadden-welfare-cuts-1000-people-a-day-pip
Err, OK.
There are just as many, likely far more, who assume it's a success just because it was Trump.
The reality is that we don't know either way.
What's for sure is that under the Obama deal which Trump junked, Iran stopped adding more centrifuges, and dramatically increased their number thereafter.
The raid was a gamble.
It might pay off; it might end up with Iran getting a bomb. We don't yet know how it plays out.
Our opinion of Trump really doesn't affect the outcome.
Trump found himself a passenger in middle eastern geopolitics and expressed his frustration while remembering he is POTUS so has some heft as well.
https://x.com/MarcoFoster_/status/1937556036291789188
All credit to them.
He might have played a blinder; he might have precipitated a nuclear armed Iran.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23830354/
He's stuck himself at centre stage. But it's not just the Middle East. He's stuck himself in the role of Global King. Now this is really quite interesting in that it was surely the route that Kings of the past took.
Since when was Chile pronounced Chill-ay.
2) you appear to think that some of social media is not fake. Why?
It won't happen over this; firstly because there will be a fudge, secondly because it is not an important enough plank of the government programme.
If I am wrong and it goes ahead and Starmer loses, it could be enough for him to resign as PM - like Cameron after the referendum in 2016. I can't remember what the referendum was about now but it seemed important at the time.
It would be a shame if you were fake, Malmesbury.
Starmer could raise taxes and not impoverish disabled people, he's not boxed in here. He's just decided the wealthy are more important
Early days, let’s see how it plays out.
The terrorist sponsoring regime 100% belligerent to Israel existence is still there, arming up, arming proxies, and enriching Uranium.
It could be opposite of what you are claiming, if what actually happened is how Israel and US not being on same page from beginning means they messed up resulting in something un clinical and barely helpful.
There’s no negotiations guaranteed as part of Trumps ceasefire. And Israel and US administrations claiming triumph for themselves - if triumph that’s actually dealt with it is not the reality, it’s actually in a less progressive got to deal with it position than 14 days ago.
De facto, Xi now wields comparable influence.
Isn't subject to the outcome of elections next year.
And is less naive.
Trump says he expects the ceasefire to last indefinitely, according to NBC.
He also declared the conflict over, expressing confidence that Israel and Iran will never resume fighting, NBC reports.
https://x.com/ILRedAlert/status/1937293344759075259
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj615p5y5kko
Score one for The Sun & Chris Philp.
But why did it take this? The Home Office must know about these abuses, as any man on the street does.
This has also piqued my interest today:
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2025-06-24/hcws736
One of the areas affected will be my borough, Newham, where presumably Councillor Rokhsana Fiaz, the current directly elected Mayor, will have to find a Ward to stand in next May if she wants to become leader of the new council though the number of enemies she has made within Newham Labour makes that far from certain.
Newham will revert to 66 councillors in 22 three member Wards.
Prohibition is rarely effective, and it strikes me as ludicrous to be advocating for another unenforceable law when the police lack the resources to enforce most of the laws already on the statute books. It's like the absurd "ban the burka" debate (let's set women free by telling them what they can wear) and comes from the same unpleasant motivation, IMHO.
It can’t be worse than the one with smug Klopp and the dorky prat going ‘wait, how’
Oh, sorry, you meant Khamanei?
There are a small handful of examples where it has been noticeable ineffective, but a much larger set of situations where it has been so effective that it doesn't register.
Cousin marriage strikes me as something that shouldn't really be too controversial. There are reasonable arguments in favour of a ban and reasonable principles in favour of not creating a ban. Reasonable democracies have instituted a ban and other reasonable democracies do not.
If it were banned, I assume we're talking of banning first cousin marriages, and that still leaves second and third cousins. One of the things that's really surprised me about moving to rural Ireland is just how extensive people's knowledge about their extended families are here. I'd be surprised if that wasn't also the case for the communities where cousin marriage is more common in Britain, so it wouldn't necessarily be all that disruptive.
So it seems to be a low stakes change in the law. You'd make a modest contribution to reducing the risk of genetic defects, at the cost of a modest extension of the limitations that already exist on permitted marriages. Not much reason to get het up by anyone. Oh for a day when that would be the most contentious issue in our politics.
We've also seen a clutch of announcements about joint production of Ukrainian-designed drones from various European countries.
Perhaps a sign of Ukraine and its closest European allies moving on from hoping the US under Trump will help.
On a social level the thought for most people of marrying or having sex with one of their cousins must surely be a bit icky to put it mildly, if people really want to they can run off to another country or something - but banning it sends out a strong signal that it's not OK and sure if it's only once it's not a massive health risk but you're going to end up with a whole bunch of people with problems if it's done generation after generation.
SCOOP: 'Big Balls' has officially left the building.
19-year-old technologist Edward Coristine, a key operative in Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) who's gone by the name "Big Balls" online, has resigned, the White House tells WIRED.
https://bsky.app/profile/wired.com/post/3lsezll5eq22b
So how did it become less prevalent in Britain, and why would most people find the idea, "a bit icky"?
@NatashaBertrand
McCaul: “I’ve been briefed on this plan in the past, and it was never meant to completely destroy the nuclear facilities, but rather cause significant damage. But it was always known to be a temporary setback.”
https://x.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1937624211473961029
Whereas councils with the committee system - as the island has literally just last month adopted - will be forced back to a cabinet model. Labour authoritarianism in action, again, sadly.
https://youtube.com/@forgotten-british-tv
https://www.youtube.com/@ClassicBritishTelly
People should be well informed about risks, able to control their fertility and have access to abortion. The state shouldn't be dictating who people can marry or have kids with. Eugenics was a bad thing.
"Following the protest, 25-year-old Liam Mizrahi, of no fixed address, was charged with a racially aggravated public order offence and held on remand to appear in court on Tuesday.
Lavina Richards, 37, of Elsdale Street, Hackney, was also held in custody. She is charged with two counts of assaulting an emergency worker, and will appear in court on Wednesday.
Bipasha Tahsin, 21, of Pinchin Street, Tower Hamlets, and Eleanor Simmonds, 31, of no fixed address, were both charged with assaulting an emergency worker. They were bailed, and will appear in court on 8 July and 25 July respectively.
Matthew Holbrook, 59, of Somerhill Road, Hove, Tom Jubert, 40, of Chippendale Street, Hackney, and Hafeza Choudhury, 28, of Berkeley Path, Luton, were charged with breaching conditions imposed under the Public Order Act and were bailed with a court date set for 21 July."
Never trust Liams.
UK to expand nuclear deterrent with US fighter jets capable of carrying warheads
Starmer to unveil purchase of 12 F-35A jets that can deliver tactical nuclear weapons, which may be kept at RAF bases
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/24/uk-to-expand-nuclear-deterrent-with-us-fighter-jets-capable-of-carrying-warheads
@joshgerstein
DOJ now fears deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom the US Government previously deported, didn't want to return, and is still trying to deport.
https://x.com/joshgerstein/status/1937618648178340109
Guido, but still.
Will the Tulip Siddiq case come to something?