mrfill

Yes - they're demanding that too....

From the Daily Mail..... the paper that even Wikipedia describes as 'unreliable'. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source-for-website

Indeed. And the ruling party can now try to get the MF party banned, thus eliminating the main opposition. Its worked in many other countries...

If you were going to start a gang dedicated to crime it does seem a bit silly to call it the Outlaws. They should really consider something a bit less obvious like The Taxi Drivers or The Police.

This sounds very ambitious. Perhaps they should start with some vigorous shuffling first.

Takes one to know one.....

According to the 2021 census, the UK has 18.6% of its population over 65, so the problem is not exactly unique to Thailand.

A massive proven liar says its fine.... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12203407/BORIS-JOHNSON-Wonder-drug-hoped-stop-raids-cheddar-chorizo-didnt-work-me.html

That'll be the sea then. Break out the long tail boats and the bulldozers!!!

Vote winning

That's generally known as 'cooking the books'. A similar action took place in 2014 when HMG were spouting that the UK economy was now the fifth largest in the world. The reason (which they never bothered to mention) was that the method of calculating GDP was revised to include a notional figure for prostitution and drugs. Hey presto! The GDP suddenly takes an upward burst and its drinks all round at such a great success.....

Oooh... Are they going to announced something named Big ???

Ah yes... issuing a directive - surely the finest way to stop all corruption.

Over the last year there have been very few stories about cannabis incidents except for the usual shock horror nonsense ones. Society hasn't collapsed, the people seem generally not that bothered and life has continued as normally as one might expect. So why suddenly is there this weird all-out campaign to ban something which has done very little harm, if any and which has possibly even been beneficial for a lot of people, both mentally and financially? It just doesn't make any sense.

Except of course the UK, which reduced its category from B to C in 2004 and then reversed it back in 2009. The current Home Secretary, Sue-Ellen Braverman is understood to want to increase it again to category A (7 yrs max for possession), but then she is too busy fighting her own acute incompetence and blaming others right now.

Must be getting old... that 8 years seems like just a few months to me.. They do say time passes faster when you get older.

Which is part of Lloyds Bank....

In the cases of Savile and Prince Andrew, going to the police had no effect, owing to the protection afforded by their position. Reports were shelved/lost and it was only when a victim went to the papers that an investigation would start. I believe this was also the case with Epstein and Weinstein. Only when exposed in the press will the police then act as they are then unable to just sweep the matter under the carpet. Wealthy people have a number of ways of silencing accusers in the courts. Some injunctions are so severe, it is even illegal to report that one exists and then there is also the possibility of paying off the victim so the perp can continue without facing justice, as we have seen. The deference paid to the rich and famous allows them to do what they like, cheat on their tax and get away with it and if anyone dares to challenge them, they have usually been brushed aside by the authorities protecting them or they bleat that they cannot get a fair trial as they have been exposed. I don't believe that is a valid excuse to let them continue their deeds unchecked as has happened so many times in the past.

Wallet transplant perhaps...

Over 10 billion people have viewed Baby Shark. That doesn't make it the best song ever written. Popularity is no guide to quality.

"UK IT Firms......." However, no mention of any UK IT company in the linked tale. Should it read "Crooked IT..." ?

I guess they could be but you'd need engines the size of a small town and you'd use quite a lot of fuel....

If the airline baggage limit is 30kg and you bring along 80kg worth, you expect to pay more., Now apply that rule to passengers......

I guess that's why Switzerland, Luxembourg and Finland are so famous for being absolute hotbeds of American industry..........