James105

I said they are travelling to the UK from France. You may consider that to be a "far right" talking point but that does not make it incorrect. It is factually accurate. Another factually correct statement I made is that a significant proportion of illegal immigrants are economic migrants and are not fleeing war at all. They might well be fleeing poverty but that is not a valid claim for asylum and makes them economic migrants. To enter the UK for economic reasons they need to apply for the correct visa just like every other legal migrant to the UK, not jump on a dinghy and enter illegally.

Well Parliament just needs to change the law so that the policy is lawful and make it watertight enough so that even the leftist judges of the appeal court cannot overrule it. I believe the democratically elected parliament is still able to make laws to enact their policies. I was responding to your baseless comment that the policy would not work. Evidence from Australia suggests that this policy does work as they already used similar to solve the problem over there.

They are travelling from France to get to the UK and a significant number are economic migrants. It is not punishing them to send them to Rwanda unless you have the somewhat racist view that Rwanda is inferior to the UK. It will only need a month or two of enacting this policy and once word gets out that making a dangerous crossing is just a more complex route to get to Rwanda then they will not make that dangerous crossing that has already taken so many lives.

When it is actually implemented it will. No illegal immigrants will make the risky journey across the channel if it is just a longer, more expensive, more dangerous and more complex way of getting to Kigali. Of course if you are happy for these people to continue to drown in the channel making this dangerous crossing then you would of course be against measures taken to remove the incentive to make such a dangerous journey.

I thought the way the system worked now is that you are obliged to call people what they prefer to be called out of "politeness" if nothing else. If someone identifies as "not" cis, but happens to be a heterosexual male or female you seem to want to continue to call them cis even if that is not how they "identify"? This is what Elon musk was referring to as the word is used as a slur by trans activists continuing to harass people on Twitter calling them "cis" or "cissy" even after they had been asked to not use that word as that is not how they want to be referred to. Anyway, following your language rules I presume you are okay with this going the other way too? So people referring to trans women as "men", "he" or "mr" is also fine as these are also not slurs, are in the dictionary and trans folk are "free to cover their ears in denial when others use it", nor are they free to dictate to others not to use these terms.

Should you actually wish to take your head out of the sand and see the data you can get it here. https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/africa-population/ The predictions are based on historical percentage increases, so unless something fundamentally changes then by 2050 Africa will have added the equivalent of the population of Europe and the USA to its numbers. An impossible number to feed and provide a good quality of life for in a region that has historically suffered from droughts and poverty before climate change became a thing.

It's not just a "population of any size" though is it and I am not sure you appreciate the scale of the increase. That is the equivalent of every single human currently living in the whole of Europe plus the entire population of the USA added to the 1.4 billion already living there. There is a crisis coming, but that would be due to the unsustainable population increase if nothing is done to address it. Considering the impact that each human is said to have on the climate I'm surprised Greta hasn't mentioned it.

The population in Africa currently is 1.4 billion and is expected to increase to 2.5 billion by 2050. Considering the problems that Africa currently has with poverty, adding an extra 1.1 billion people into the mix is going to cause a lot more poverty and drive human migration. So unless climate change is responsible for such a population increase I really don't think that will be the major cause of increased illegal migration.

Sure, but if I walked onto an airplane and discovered the only method of controlling the plane the pilot had was a wireless Logitech gaming controller (rather than the established tried and tested controls) I guarantee you that I am walking straight back off again.

"Fried" is just a term used to describe any kind of chip malfunction and if your controller malfunctions whilst sitting on your sofa then the consequences for you are quite minimal. The controller wasn't the cause of this but it was just a very visible pointer to the overall shoddy and hacky design of the sub. The bigger issue was the hubris of the owner who deemed getting the sub certified to operate at those depths as not important and would just delay getting to launch.

Actually, they have spent millions already getting the very specialised equipment to the search area. Sending them home now isn't going to save much money and they might as well spend the time practicing/testing to see if they could actually retrieve the craft using existing tech which is currently an unanswered question should the craft have been found intact. Besides, if they don't retrieve the craft then maybe some enterprising company will start selling tours in future so that wealthy tourists can gawp at the wreckage of the OceanGate Titan.

Best case scenario for them now is that the hull imploded under pressure and they died instantly 4 days ago. If they were alive until their oxygen ran out then that particular way to go is absolutely terrifying and is now in my top 3 of worst possible ways to die.

Because unless the technology (bluetooth in this case), is 100% perfect and has never, ever failed, then at 13,000 feet under the ocean you either need replacement parts or tools in case it does fail, or alternatively you could simply use a wired connection as backup. And no, I don't know what their backup plan is but based on their (non-existent) backup plans as to what to do when they lose contact with the sub and it doesn't surface by itself then I can make an educated guess they would not have one for this either. Hence my statement that to not have a wired connection for this is too bonkers to contemplate. At a depth of 13,000 feet there needs to be contingencies for literally everything and that is why it is relevant.

Seriously? So if the bluetooth chip gets fried or malfunctions in either the computer or the controller what is your plan to resolve this? Keep spare components/tools in a sub that has barely enough room for the 5 people on board or the space to carry out even the smallest of maintenance tasks?

Looks like the controller is also wireless and there was no indication I've seen that it could be plugged in anywhere with a cable. Maybe it can as relying on a bluetooth connection 13,000 feet under the oceans surface is just too bonkers to contemplate. I know rich people are not risk averse as you simply cannot make that kind of money without taking on a lot of risk, but to not ask the "what happens if the sub gets stuck at the bottom of the ocean with no way to surface" or "how will we be found if we lose comms/power" kind of questions before getting on board is something I've not been able to get my head around.

Apparently the CEO of OceanGate did not want to hire any experienced 50+ year old white guys as they are not inspirational. https://nypost.com/2023/06/21/why-stockton-rush-didnt-hire-50-year-old-white-guys-for-titanic-sub-tours/ I suppose their experience would have pointed out the reckless flaws in the design of this venture, meaning it would have cost more money and time to get to launch which is an inconvenience easily avoided by only hiring recent college grads. Let's hope the experienced, uninspirational 50+ year old captains of the rescue vessels find and reach them in time.

Ah yes, think I read something where it said it was controlled by the support ship. That said I still am surprised that considering the vast amount these people were paying ($250,000 per head), there wasn't a second sub that dived with them just in case one lost comms and ran into a problem exactly as this one has. I'd be properly freaking out by now if I was still alive and stuck 12,500 feet down at the bottom of the ocean in a tiny little craft.

You'd think that at $250,000 a ticket for this trip they would at least have a spare sub that can reach the depths they were going to that they take along just in case something like this happens. Even if you paid me $250,000 to go on this trip I would decline. The sub cannot be piloted by those on board and it has to be controlled by the 'mothership' on the surface. All that has to happen is the sub gets snagged on something (as has probably happened here) or loss of communication and it's pretty much game over.

Thats an old article from Oct 21 so is irrelevant. Those of us who stated lockdowns would do more harm than good have long been proven correct with Sweden showing the lowest excess deaths in comparison to lockdown countries. https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/sweden-has-the-lowest-excess-mortality-rate-after-the-pandemic-despite-refusing-to-lock-down/news-story/df50001366bb09b6a20421520cbfbf53 The problem with only focusing on one thing is that the other 1000s of other things that can send people to an early grave were ignored and then exacerbated. The knock on effects of poverty, which is a huge killer, has not even started to kick in yet. The failure was lockdowns and other insane measures.

There were very, very few people making those laws as they were never put to a vote in parliament and democracy was effectively thrown out of the window during covid. It is a shame those people in that video were not responsible for making the laws as they clearly recognised how little danger they and other healthy folks faced from the virus so would not have inflicted the stupid, damaging rules on the rest of the population.

That is whataboutery. They were not videoed visiting dying loved ones or attending funerals as they would have been prevented from doing so by the covid jobsworths, so they did not break those specific rules. They were just enjoying themselves having a drink together in private, as 100% of the UK population with a modicum of common sense also did during lockdowns.

None of the people featured in that video have rule making powers. They are no different to any other person (such as myself) who "flagrantly" breached lockdown rules on a regular basis as they knew how pointless they were. The punishment for lockdown breaches was the same as a parking ticket anyway so hardly anything to get worked up about but if you slavishly followed all the rules I can imagine how it would be infuriating. Still, next time you will know better than conform to such nonsense and engage in a bit of rule breaking yourself. This way you won't get so annoyed when you see that other people were enjoying themselves whilst you abstained.

Of course they were. By December 2020 everyone knew the demographic that were at actual risk from the virus, they knew lockdowns were just pointless theatre to make it look like the government was doing "something" and for their sanity they chose to ignore the stupid lockdown rules just like every other rational minded person. The anger should be directed at those who actually forced the governments hand in inflicting these insane policies on the populous in the first place: 1. The SAGE scientists. 2. The Tory party numbskulls who ignored conflicting evidence from other scientists (e.g Great Barrington report) 3. The Labour party who only wanted harder, longer lockdowns 4. The media whose propaganda led to scaring the population into believing that curfews and lockdowns were "saving lives". The only thing for those people in the video to be embarrassed about is the standard of dancing which was awful, but young people having fun at Christmas time should not be something to get angry about in comparison to the harm that was inflicted on the country with pointless lockdowns.

He is widely reported to be a misogynist so of course he would be okay with men to competing against women in their competitions.

Hindsight was not needed. Decades of scientific research had been undertaken prior to this virus on exactly the action to be taken in the event of a virus like this being released into the wild. Lockdowns and masks were never considered as a solution and it was obvious that it would do more harm than good. Boris had it correct in the first few weeks and then was bullied into changing his mind by the media, his own party, narcissistic attention seeking scientists and the opposition. If he was a stronger character then he would have followed the science established previously and stood his ground. There were ample opportunities following the first lockdown to change tack once the severity of the illness on healthy folks was established to be minimal and take a Sweden like approach. We are not talking about drink driving though are we? The fine he was given for eating cake at work was equivalent to a minor speeding offence or parking ticket which reflects the severity of the 'crime'. He not only paid the fine but then forced to resign for it and yet this still is not enough punishment. To be very clear I do not like Boris Johnson and I think he was/is a coward who bowed far too quickly to media frenzy about taking away peoples freedoms for their "safety" so he remained popular instead of accepting short term unpopularity. We just seem to be following (once again) in the footsteps of the USA and using means other than democratic votes to ensure that a candidate that is not 'liked' by the establishment is prevented from serving. I do not like this direction of travel.