Patong2021

There is a skilled labour shortage. Arabs from Gaza and from the Palestinian Territory previously filled many of these jobs. However, ever since the arabs used the opportunity to launch terror attacks, Israel no longer extends work permits for the Gazans to cross into Israel to work, and the Palestinian Arabs must pass a security background check which they won't do.

I am at the stage of life, where I am delighted when a pretty woman talks to me. 🤭

The election will not be decided for another day.

Motor vehicles are prohibited on Israeli beaches. Aside from minimizing injuries on popular beaches, there are security concerns. Someone driving a vehicle on a beach could easily be mistaken as a terrorist and be dealt with accordingly. A simple visit with Google shows beaches rules such as; - Glass bottles are prohibited on the beach - NO motor sports (jet skis, boats) are allowed on the beach. - Motorized vehicles are forbidden on beaches and the boardwalk. - Bonfires are prohibited on operating beaches.

Will you amend your stereotyping when you discover that Amir Midhat is an Israeli Arab? In the Arabic language, Amir means Prince, Rich, or Cultivated and Midhat (the english form of مدحت) means "praise" or "eulogy"

The cops are weak because there is no point in trying to be a conscientious police officer when the corruption and favourtism in the senior ranks is so prevalent.

Which states do not require ID and do not use paper ballots? The key swing states which have thin winner margins are Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. They use voting systems with paper records.

The largest contribution to the 500,000 killed in Syria was made by Hezbollah personnel fighting on behalf of Assad. They were supported and supplied by Iranian Republican Guard elite units who provided missile and air support. Hezbollah is a proxy army of Iran. Hamas is the Gaza Arab version of the Muslim Brotherhood. Its military units are supplied by Iran. Its military training is provided by Iran. Hezbollah operates as a defacto state in Lebanon and owes its loyalty to Iran, not to Lebanon. In effect it is a military occupying force. Iran finances militants in the West Bank of Israel/Jordan/Palestine. They co-ordinate their activities with Hamas and Hezbollah. The Houthis who have been attacking international shipping and targeting Israeli vessels are a proxy army of Iran. An estimated 250,000 people have died in Yemen's civil conflict.

Europeans would go tut tut, and offer thoughts and prayers. They would tell the USA not to worry, that it was only some juden who were killed. Europeans would carry on without any concerns, although they most likely would enact draconian immigration laws to keep any Israeli refugees out of Europe. Israelis would be quickly and forcibly deported . In the UK, Whitehall experts would realize that they were the next target and would counsel defensive measures. The Labour government would ignore the advice and say no worries, that it was only Israel and offer benign indifference. It would eventually dawn on the UK government that the country was at risk and while talking peace, would expect the USA to fix the problem and when the USA did, would condemn the US action. The USA would be split with some celebrating the destruction of Israel, and others encouraged to work towards the destruction of the USA itself. Others would realize that Iran really is a threat to national security and the USA would then act accordingly. Canada would offer thoughts and prayers and recommend restraint. The government would offer sanctimonious counsel on the importance of peace, while hoping that the USA intervened. Japan and South Korea would offer money to buy protection, while planning a preemptive full out attack on Iran's nuclear ally North Korea as they would expect North Korea to be emboldened and to launch its own missiles.

Consistency is the cornerstone of due process. The current US methodology allows too much discretionary power to be applied by an individual Secretary of State which can result in an abuse of power. Under the current approach, there is no guarantee that politicians will not use the law to interfere in the fair administration of an election. We have seen this in the past when some Americans were prevented from voting. Today, we hear of stories of unauthorized people being registered to vote. This is not a Democrat v.Republican issue, as the concerns raised by both political factions are legitimate. The US Federal Government need not necessarily be in charge of a federal election. In well managed democracies there are independent non partisan electoral Commissions responsible for the running of a national election. examples are Electoral Commission UK, Elections Canada, Australian Electoral Commission etc. All of these entities have an unblemished record of running fair and transparent elections and are distinguished by the high level of confidence the public has in the organizations. If these countries can run non sectarian, non partisan elections, surely the USA can too, or are you implying that Americans are not mature enough or not trustworthy enough to do so? Political interference should be taken out of the administration of an election.

How about restoring/protecting wetlands and not replacing forests/jungle with palm trees?

Am I the only one who noticed the separation of men and women? That is rather revealing. I have long noticed the absence of women from leadership or command roles. I get it that some of the elderly males will say, but women cannot chase down criminals and fight them into submission with muay thai skills. However, none of the males sitting there with their fat bellies looks like they do that. Maybe if there were more women in senior roles, the administration of the RTP would be better managed.

At this time, I can only state the obvious. Harris will win the popular vote. I am not confident I can predict the electoral college result. It is going to drag out for weeks. The USA will conduct itself like a developing nation that cannot offer properly run elections. One takeaway is that the US approach to running federal elections is inefficient, and guarantees dispute. There is no consistency in voting rules and how the process is executed. Each state has its own rules and each state is subject to potential political influence. Americans really should be ashamed of themselves that they let it get this bad.

Respectfully, I doubt Trump cares one way or the other. He just doesn't appreciate the worldwide impact of Russian expansionism and thinks he can negotiate with Putin, His is the isolationist view of the USA that thought it could negotiate with European despots too. It is the mindset that embraces tariffs without considering the impact of retaliatory trade measures or of costs to the non wealthy US citizen.

The Republican movement is driven in large part by Scottish and Irish nationalists, and leftist militants. I am not discounting or dismissing Republican sentiment because of that, but it is a vital characteristic that cannot be ignored. It is a core group, neither growing nor shrinking in proportion to the UK population. The public as a whole does not like change. Despite all the marketing buzzwords and use of terms such as "market disruption" or "agents of change", people resist change until there is a crisis point. The most recent crisis point was the final period of the Tory administration. It induced a shift in public sentiment and an embrace of anyone other than the Conservatives. The change King Charles is effecting now is intended to prevent a crisis of confidence in the institution. He has maintained a slow and steady course to progress. Andrew's refusal to co-operate and his attitude is one of selfishness and perhaps to a certain extent, resentment of Charles and of William. IMO, he sees himself as smarter than his siblings and has a delusion of self importance. Andrew fought to keep the titles for his useless daughters, in stark contrast to Anne didn't want her children to have titles. Harry shows a similar delusion of importance. Andrew is a magnet for Republican sentiments, and when you look at him and his history, it is not difficult to appreciate the Republican sentiments. This is why Andrew had to be better managed. Republicans should learn from the recent migration to Farage that there is a large segment of the UK population who will cling to old familiar traditions, like the monarchy. It isn't a question of costs or in keeping up with the times, but one of traditions, perceived old values etc. Support for the Monarchy may be tepid, but supporters present as a diverse demographic; It is a potent mix of young and old, of John Bull and immigrant, of social progressive and of old guard conservative . Push them too hard, and they will fight back. People don't like being lectured and told what to do, which is what the Republican movement often does.

It is unlikely that iran will be able to launch a significant bombardment. I anticipate a pre-emptive wipeout of Iran. Should that option not be open to Israel, as it would require the tacit co-operation of multiple Arab states, I would expect an overwhelming intercept and neutralization by French, UK, US and Arab nations. They won't be protecting Israel, but will be protecting their own vested oil interests and economies. Any problems in the region will increase the cost of oil. The underlying goal of Russia is to destabilize Gulf oil supplies. This would ensure that the current buyers of Russian oil continue and that the sanctions applied to Russian oil continue to be ignored. India acts as the most important facilitator of Russian oil sales to the west. The oil is shpped out of Russia by tanker, transferred at sea to Indian tankers and then sent to India where it is refined and then exported to western nations including the USA. It is impossible to trace the oil once it enters the Indian refining system.

Who benefits when the USA goes about having a civil rampage? Russia, China, Iran, North Korea. In respect to the documented evidence; Who is circulating the false news reports purporting to be Fox, CBS and FBI issued? Russia. Who has been implicated in the attempted assassination of a presidential candidate? Iran Who has been caught hacking and stealing confidential information from campaign data files? Iran Who has been linked to the social media misinformation? China and Russia Who has been tied to civil and university campus disturbances and protests? Iran I do hope that when Americans see reports on social media of "election stealing" followed by requests to protest that they think before blindly following. Only an idiot would think or expect that the results of an election will be blocked or stopped if they violently protest.

Ok. And where are the revenues derived from the activities attached to the monarchy, and the revenues gained from Royal estates and properties? You present only estimated costs.

In civil suits, there is a finding of responsibility. In criminal suits, there is finding of guilt, beyond reasonable doubt. Please consider what you are saying when you wish the very important principle of reasonable doubt be put aside. Innocent people would be more likely to be convicted. Is that really where you want the justice system to go, for the presumption of innocence to be cast aside? It has served society well for 2000+ years as the concept dates back to the Israelite's biblical laws and the Roman civil laws. We saw what happened when some segments of society chose to apply it in their biased way. Do you wish a return to the Spanish Inquisition and the edicts of the Church during Medieval times?

Not making excuses, nor commenting on Andrew's responsibility. I approach this as a cost benefit exercise. You have assumed that anyone who is not guilty will fight to the end. That is not the reality. Relatively few personal injury cases go to trial. An estimated 90%+ of US filings never do. Even when they do go to trial, many civil suits are settled before the final adjudication. The larger the case, the greater the likelihood of a settlement. Andrew was hard pressed to fund his defence, and was relying on his family to assist. The family believed it best to settle as the case was tarnishing the brand image.

If he loses, it will be because US voters thought long and hard and put the principles of Democracy and the Rule of Law above personal grievance.

Unfortunately, your lauded community notes are more likely to be the source of intentional misinformation and scams.

Do you know where the money for the Crown comes from? Apparently you do not. Neither you, nor the UK taxpayer are directly paying. The Sovereign Grant, formerly known as the Civil List, is a set percentage of the Crown Estate profits that is given to the royal family each year to cover the costs of their activities on behalf of the UK. This is approximately 25% of the profits. The balance of profits go to the to the public purse and are used to pay for things such as the generous benefits UK citizens receive. The Royals Family may own crown jewels and some fine arts, but the assets are frozen in that they cannot be sold or taken out of the UK without the permission of the government. It may be theirs, but they can not sell it. Your anti monarchists can claim as they wish, but their sums are sus and unsubstantiated. Even if 510 million, it is a small cost considering the income the monarchy generates for the people of the UK. As per the Regional Studies.org, Recent attempts to measure the size of the impact of the royal family on UK tourism have estimated the capital value of UK monarchy as a business to be £67.5 billion+ and the annual contribution to the UK economy to be £1.766 billion. These estimates included indirect economic effects on tourism, trade, media and arts.

It is often more cost effective to enter into a financial settlement than to continue a lengthy legal battle. The only ones who prosper are the legal counsels. The alleged victim is claiming damages. The victim typically wants to be compensated for the real or the fabricated damages. To continue to defend some claims consumes more in legal costs than the claimant is demanding. Also, a drawn out litigation can damage a brand value. He was wise to settle when he could as he could never win even if "innocent" as his name was sullied and he was assumed guilty by the public.

Because the evidence was not sufficient to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.