MicroB

Its more related to the nature of the criminality concerned. The offence is primarily about power, more than sexuality (many abuse boys and girls). So they are arrogant, they feel untouchable. They might have positions of trust in the community. Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter, Jonathan King, Rolf Harris; they were brazen. Gary Glitter contined to offend after he was convicted. He is back in prison, afterbeing recalled, because he downloaded child pornography. This forum reported the case of Richard Burrows, who was living openly in Phuket, and was well known in the expat community. He was infact a scout master on the run.

If it didn't, then neither did yours. You lack comprehension. This is a discussion about two foreigners accused of committing serious child oiffences in Thailand For reasons only known to yourself, you have chosen to try and deflect from the subject, possibly because you don't want further discussion on the subjectm and have attempted thread deflection. First you failed when you tried to bring Israel into this, and everyone (rightfully) ignored your rant. And then you tried again, for attention seeking. Orwell has got nothing to do with child abuse.

No link provided. There is a person of exactly the same same with a significant digital trail. I hope you are reporting the name correctly otherwise there is potential reputational slander,

The reference made is nothing to do with the Thai government. The poster is conflating his own UK prejudices with Thai law enforcement.

It will be a criminal act. The plan falls down when the US leader says no US taxpayer money will be used. I don't see any pubicly listed bank willing to break international law to loan a developer. The only way evacuation of a population for safety reasons could be considered legal is if the population was transferred to Israel. The act of sending them to a 3rd country is illegal.

Deliberate mis-spelling of a name . Reported.

Poland is the biggest contributor of Starlink terminals, and is also paying Ukraine;s subscription to the service. https://www.voanews.com/a/poland-pays-for-ukraine-s-starlink-subscription- users subscribing to the service. says-its-deputy-pm/7984648.html SpaceX has a commerical relationship with the Polish government. It is not a servent of the US government. The US government might regard "Starlink" as a controlled export, but they have made no indication they will block Russian subscribers.

Its just you. The Reddit "UkraineWarVideoReport" is the place to go to see FPV drone footage, headcam combat, Russian soldiers being picked off one by one, Bradley-T80 engagements, executions, rotted corpses, roads of death, all of that, far stronger than in previous wars, if you are looking for that. Even some of Russian soldiers swinging around decapitated heads, if that's your thing.

A few here are short of a few marbles.

Here are the terms you need to use. "Deep State" is a right wingnut term,

Deep State is a Turkish term, advanced by Islamists pushing against secular army officers who were worried about how Islamist Parties would ruin the vision of Ataturk's Republic. So you don't understand the Establishment in the UK. The Establishment is often blamed for preventing the UK acting, eg the idea that the Falklands War was caused byn failures in the FCO, who didn't care much for far flung distant islands full of sheep. The establishment in the UK stops the UK from doing anything. Your version in Yankee Doodle Land as an establishment making your government do things it doesn't want to do (which is a highly convenient excuse). Some mob in your country has picked up this Turkish term to invent an imaginery hidden internal enemy, when really the internal enemy is incompetance. The Bradley; perfect example of incompetance. This is why your DoD has spaffed so much money up against the proverbial wall. The Military Industrial Complex is a made up term by politicians to hide their own incompetance. The whole GWOT was an utter ball ache for the defence industry, with the frequent UORs in play, and constantly shifting standards, and penny pinching. I worked in that industry. You be amazed how many want to go and do something else besides making things go bang (called diversification). When you supply the MOD and DoD, you find as a company, its really hard to make money with anyone else (export licences). Obviously a comedy with a dose of poetic licence etc

I'm a Party Member. No, my vote didn't go to her. As for those who voted for her, some of them voted for for reasons that were nothing to do with her policies, her gender or her looks. Honestly, when the Conservative and Unionist Party introduced the membership vote in the 1990s, it was a constitutional disaster. We know the Labour Party had done it since the 1980s, and really, with only one exception (and as politicians go, irrespective of his policies, Blair was an exceptional politician with generally good instincts), it has been an utter electoral disaster for them (eg Corbyn); the current government is an example of a government losing an election, rather than the opposition winning it. I already have a vote. Why should I get a second one because I pay £2.50 subs a week. Both parties now find themselves at the mervy of unelected activists. I hate people using the trash term "deep state"; its a moronic term, and anyone using it is a knuckle dragging unthinking moron who plays too many violent video games. "Establishment" is a perfectly good term without resorting to stupid dumbed down terms like "Deep State". The Establishment ultimately draw a pension and retire. Activists are forever. No one literally knows who they are. Anyone, of any nationality, can join a British political party. Russians and Americans can join. Labour supporters can join the Conservative Party and vice versa. Data Protection Laws mean, unless I'm in the BNP, my name will never get out into the piblic domain. The Conservative membership is generally described as the blue rinse brigade. Well, thats who you see down the Connie Club on a sunday afternoon tucking into the carvery special with a half of Brown. But that is a tiny tiny fraction of the membership. The membership get their chance to influence policy at conference, or through the local associations. They can select candidates for their area (to an extent). And lastly, joining the Party is your way of supporting the creed. MPs are not elected to Parliament to represent the Party members. They represent their constituents, all of them. Whips ensure they vote with the government. The Prime Minister is First Among Equals, and only there at the pleasure of the MPs, who represent the people. The PM has to manage the Cabinet and usually 300 MPs. I want a PM who has the most support among their MPs, because to get things done, they need MP votes. the Votes of anonymous party members means jack. The membership process is shonky; the ballots issued are ridiculous and the online voting security weak. And this vote decides who is PM. It should be the other way around, if they want members invlved; the membership to shortlist the candidates, MPs to take the final decision. Its been used 3 times since 2019 to select a PM, and 4 times to select a Leader. From a party point of view, its been a disaster every time. And I include Boris. Everyone loved Boris. He's a laugh at Parties. But he's not leadership material. The system is wide open to foreign interference from Russia, China and the US. The system has encouraged a generation of MPs who know no shame; as long as they can mobilise activists, they feel they have a place. In the past, sacked ministers would slink away to the back benches forever, or stand down, have a by election. Not now, its a badge of honour, a book title. Its right that we don't have a general election if there is a change in Prime Minister. It goes back to First Among Equals. We don't vote for a PM, we vote for our MP, and we lend him or her our vote. But the system has been sorely abused by a degenerated Conservative Party. We will be back. Luckily we are facing a Labour Party with a mile wide majority that's an inch thick, which is managing to hang itself. But the Tories, with a full front bench, need to occupy the bylines rather than the buffoons at Reform UK. I'm not sure who will be leading the party at the next election; it won't be Kimi. With 2016 behind us, but the country likely to face external threats from expected and unexpected directions, I am expecting there is the opportunity for the cream to rise to the top

Hopefully the AI generated image was posted in jest.

She'susing ridiculous language. "Woke" is as annoying as "Bloody PC". They mean the same thing. When some Yank came up with the term "Deep State", it was to sell a book. "Deep State" has always been around. Its called "The Establishment", which sounds less sexy to the conspiracy theory loons. Maggie Thatcher recounted that the comedy show "Yes Minister", which showed how Sir Humphry Appleby, a Permanent Secretary (a senior civil servant) would constantly interfere in the actions of his minister, Jim Hacker, to carry out policy, sometimes to promote a civil service line, sometimes to avoid Hacker looking like a fool. When Thatcher said it was accurate (but funny), the country's reaction wasn't of national outrage to root out the Humphrys, but a collective "thank f*** for that, someone sane is running the show" (ie. the civil service is reality kept the coiuntry ticking along, navigating that course of progress.

And given he isn't paid, no severance pay. And since the Supreme Court ruling, the President can confiscate his wealth, declaring it an Official Act. Half a Trillion would be very handy in addressing the national debt. He'll soon figure out how to make it back, he;s a very clever man. And its not like he has an expensive lifestylle, what with his crappy clothes and stuff. See you in court Elon. What, you don't have any money for lawyers now? What a shame. Steve Bannon was sacked essentially because he tried to claim the credit for the 45th President's 2016 win. Musk's powers as a soothsayer are not infallible. He predicted by 2020, self driving taxis would be a common thing, that by 2022, buying a car without autonomous driving would be like buying a horse. I suspect Doge will not save as much money as expected, or rather the money saving headlines will be overshadowed by disasters such as planes dropping out of the sky due to lack of air controllers, imports piling up at the docks, Brexit style, due to lack of customs inspectors, VA cripples out on the street due to closure of a hospital etc. The savings will generate extra inecessary costs. The body language stinks. Who was in charge that day. Not the President, who was physically repelled by a small child. Make no mistake. It wasn't a bring Your Son to Work day. Elon used the child as a prop to send a message (though ironically , Musk can, as usual, hardly string a sentence together).

You mean GDP per capita. The reason is obviously the incorporation of former Warsaw Pact countries, increasing the popuation, but not adding to the GDP. The same effect would be seen if the US solved its immigration crisis by declaring Mexico and the rest of Central as America, GDP would rise a bit, but GDP per capita would fall. But that doesn't mean an American in, say, Rhode Island, is suddenly earning less, and an Honduran peasant farmer is suddenly feeling like a Gringo. But it would be a crude measure, because stuff in Honduras would still be cheaper than in Rhode Island. There was a time when one could take a Ryan Air flight to Talin, and have a really cheap weekend; cheap beer, cheap food, lovely sights. Not now. EU membership has benefited these states. All the Polish plumbers went home, and Poland is doing very well now. So, you need to express GDP per capita PPP. And if you started breaking it down by EU member state, you really need to also break down US numbers by State. In the EU and US, there are states where GDP per capita are very high, and low. €125,043 in Luxembourg , 2024 €15,773 in Bulgaria, 2024 $117,332 nominal GDP per capita in New York , 2024 $53,061 nominal GDP per capita in Mississippi, 2024 Luxembourg is a really expensive place to be, so everyone nips over the border to Germany for a cheap beer. Bulgaria offers pretty good cheap skiing and beach holidays. Its all knock off gear on the slopes, full of poor Bulgarians enjoying a snowboarding holiday on their Chinese boards. Thing is, I lived in the US. Yeah, property is expensive in New York. I have some of my reports in New York on a wage that in UK terms seems pretty decent. But I know they can hardly scrape the money for a rabbit hutch apartment, like the reality of living in London for most people. From living in Alabama (which in GDP per capita is not much better than Mississippi)). Yeah, it seemed you could get a lot of house for your bob there, but a can of coke was the same as New York, so was a burger. Some people did seem to live in abject poverty. And I read now its not uncommon for people to sleep in cars in the US.. On the flipside, my cinoany has operations in India. My opposite number over there has a wise old head. Yeah, his salary is less than mine. But he has a swish apartment, with a brand new marble bathroom. a couple of maids, a driver, plus a substantial country pile. He lives a good life. I am sure most here are attracted to Thailand because you can live a good life very cheaply, some might even say its a better quality of life from where they are from. So when it comes down to the individual fellow in the street, and how they feel, its complex. My junior Indian employees naturTin the media. But then I point out that in India, I can get a very decent beer for 50 rupees, a lovely meal for 200, and in fact Westerners are looking to retire to live in Asia. Different countries have different priorities in life. Americans like having 2 zillion TV channels, and take out food all the time. Me. I'm happy with 4 channels and a good homecooked meal with no bleached chicken. Yes, I pay a lot more for fuel, but I am less panc'd than my US colleagues when there are changes in gas price (actually the duty on fuel somewhat cushions fluctautions). I run a V8 Jag and MX5 in the UK, and a 10 year old Fiesta and brand new CX3 in Thailand. I have a $700,000 house when old friends of mine in Missouri, with, on paper (US Army Colonel, University Professor), a higher income than me, struggle with a $400k house. Its a nice house mind. Their other outgoings seem higher, despite hunting all of their meat. And probably those dirt poor Bulgarians, when not on the ski slopes or on a Black Sea beach, are tucking into Gyuvech or Shopska Salad. Their car will be crap though, like a 10 year old Mercedes or BMW, with leather.

I hadn't seen that. Very interesting when you consider Saint Pierre and Miquelon; that tiny vestige of France in North America. Canada shares a border with the EU! Possible considering the UK's membership of the CPTPP.

Well, for many outsiders, there are aspects of the American justice system that are curious; this issue about prosecutors and sheriffs running for election, and you are probably right; it affects professional judgement. So I suspect you are equally scornful about how the DA, who was running for office, was particularly keen to "get " Alec Baldwin, merely because he was a celebrity, and it would look good in her campaign. https://www.businessinsider.com/ex-special-prosecutor-alec-baldwin-rust-case-campaign-report-2023-3 (not the original piece, which appeared in the New York Times, which is paywalled) Justice, as you intimate, should be blind. It is not blind where you institutionalise a process that politicises the entire judicial process, and force judges, DAs, sheriffs to declare themselves for one of the two main parties (and hardly or never it seems for any other party or as an independant). Hence ou now have this mess of the Supreme Court being completely political, when it should be apaolitical, as the ultimate arbiter. Judges should not be in the pocket of any President. The United States is the only country in the world where voters elect prosecutors. But it wasn't always that way. The American prosecutor did not start as an elected official. After the Revolutionary War, most states gave their governors, judges, or legislators the power to appoint prosecutors. Starting with Mississippi in 1832, however, states adopted new constitutions, statutes, or amendments that made prosecutors elected officials. By 1861, nearly three-quarters of the states in the Union elected their prosecutors. "Packing the Court" is not new; Roosevelt tried it in 1937. If this particular President wants to be remembered in history, depoliticisation of the entire judicial process would be a brave step. Reform starts at the top, so he needs to impose term limits on those judges, and possibly follow a model instituted by Idaho in 1967 which successfully removed judges from politics. I could forsee genuine bipartisan support from that (and opposition from both parties). It needs a change in the Constitution, so it woul be a considerable challenge, but lasting.

They said the same in 2022, because we assumed the Russians would swamp Ukrainian defences in a manner to how the Americans took Baghdad in a Blitzkrieg. The talk then was whether the Russians had enough forces for crowd control and to contain a probable insurgency that was much more capable than the Iraqis. Serendipity meant that year, Ukraine had a cracking good Eurovision song (accessible to a wide range of cultures, with just enough Ukrainian in it, I think a good fusion), which combined with a brilliant bit of propagandising (the official video) grabbed our attention in a way that the war between the Armenians and Azeris just never did. Ukraine might not be winning, but they are not losing. The Russian gains are miniscule, and at great cost. Ukraine are still in the fight, when hardly anyone thought they would last. In 1973 and 1967, we all supported Israel, when confronted by numerically superior forces, they resisted, and stood, sustained by a combination ingenuity and outside support (despite some parties making it difficult). There are those in the wealthy West who whinge about the cost. But the cost we've paid is nothing compared to the Ukrainians who seem to be pretty united on this thing. Ironically, if dickless Putin had sat back, Zelensky would have likely lost the 2024 election anyhow, Putin might have even gotten his guy in, or maybe now would be dealing with the Ukrainian Willy Wonka. Zelensky narrowly won the election as an outsider. Perhaps that's Putin's real fear; not imaginary Nazi's next door or the idea of a mocking comedian next door, but that Ukrainian poitics will increasingly resemble the normal politics seen in the rest of Europe, where there are normal lively debate, dicources, disagreement and aggreement, and orderly transfers of power. And Russians would start to want that, rather than the sham that is supposedly Russian democracy, that Russians basically don't believe in.

I think an odd pidgeon English phrase like "invent of the internet" says enough, that he's probably not in Bangrak.

America couldn't organise an election without controversy in 2020 and 2024, how could the Ukraine do that with displaced populace, and 25% of the country occupied. How could Zelensky campaign in the occupied areas? The nearest comparison I suppose that comes to mind is the 1864 US Election, when a large portion of the country never participated. Ukraine has a hybrid Presidency. Unlike the US system, the Ukrainian Parliament can simply dismiss the President through a vote of no confidence. So its inaccurate to say Zelensky is a dictator, ie has absolute power. I am not permitted to post a non-English link on this site, but the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (you will have to google to find it, unless there is a rule change) ran a survey which indicated about 85% of Ukrainians were opposed to a wartime election. The poll reveals Ukrainians are quite sophisicated in their understanding of their vote. People had firm opinions. All of Ukraine is represented in the Rada, including Crimea. The members of the Rada, in their respective parties, nominate Presidential candidates, so very different to the US system, where there is an election before the election. Unlike the US elections, but more like European elections, elections include many more candidates with a realistic shot of power. We all know that effectively the US is a two party state. At the last election in 2019, there were 39 Ukrainian candidates, which lead to a second run off poll. SO in wartime, you are expecting UKrainians to go to polling stations twice. The question is do you hold a Presidential election before or after a Parliamentary election. Ukraine has a proportional voting system. Voting districts, like anywhere, are set based on population. The war has resulted in some districts becoming swollen with refugees, but others are under populated, resulting in a parliament being controlled by a handful of districts. The constitution forbids an election right now. The CEC controls when an election is helpd. To hold the election would need the support of the Rada to change the law. Finally, consider the funding of the political parties. The displacement of citizens has meant the parties are more dependant on oligarchs, increasing the fears it won't be a fair election (eg money from Russia). Most naive Americans don't know anyone who has really lived in wartime conditions. In Western Europe, we at least still have a generation of Grandparents who can relate. The American objection to not holding an election under truly wartime conditions has never been tested. Basically, they don't know what they are talking about. Come baqck when you've fixed your hanging chads and lecture the world. We know they have an unfair system, the electoral college, plus the ridiculous candidate selection system. The make up of Congress and Senate defy belief that Americans really only support one of two parties. We know other systems are unfair, eg Westmnister, but we aren;t going around lecturing other countries. Americans, even when they are opposed to "nation building" still have a natural instinct to lecture other people to follow the "American Way". Can't help themselves.

When you watch the clip, you know what he's doing, and the reaction from the audience (laughs). They all knew what he was doing. Now it was a Nazi salute, not a wave, but he was just doing it as some infantile gesture to rile to so-called "libtards". He's a grifter, and is trying to ingratiate himself with a new crowd surrounding Trump. To be fair to Bannon, given his previous career, I think he does believe himself to be "patriotic" and a believer in the Constitution, of sorts. He split from Trump a second time because he view Donald Jr's meetings with Russian fixers (agents) as "treasonous". He's a very flawed and nasty character, but he's outside of the camp. And now he's having to ingratiate himself with a new Right, which is more at home with the world and values in which Elon Musk was raised, than Bannon's own childhood (a world that believes some people, based on race, gender, caste, ethnicity or other happenchance of birth, are naturally superior to others). I think he recognises how unAmerican some of Musk's core values are. He's a nobody now, just trying to buy time to stay out of jail, avoid bankruptcy.

The 1945 election was carried out a few months after the war in Europe was concluded, and London was no longer under the threat of V1 and V2 attack. There was debate on which day to hold the poll; the original date was objected to because it would have been at the time Coventry factory workers were on holiday (the first peace holiday). https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1945-06-11/debates/6899cc6d-cf82-4396-8fc1-33c66caaeb28/PostponementOfPollingDayBill?highlight=general election#contribution-cc1de64e-0be1-47d3-b672-ea2db4b647ae Britain has had many wars and elections were not affected. But it was the fact that the homeland was directly affected that was the deciding factor. VE Day was the true end of WW2. A war carried on in the Pacific for a few months, but by then, the War had assumed a different dimension. Hence there are widespread events marking VE Day, but those marking VJ Day are more muted. My grandad was a POW of Japan, and finally got home in December 1945. Cetainly by then, no one at home wanted to hear about the war anymore. After May 1945, it was no longer a wartime Britain, no more that it has been wartime US since 2001.

Hes using a code and recycling an old trope. He's referencing the Ukrainian Leader's faith. Used the same term in other posts, and needs to be challenged on it.

The $300 billion is a fiction. its nowhere near that. https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-political-military-affairs/releases/2025/01/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine The US military failed to properly account for stuff that was shipped, and in the end, a lot of stuff wasn't shipped. Much of the kit shipped had zero value, ie old equipment held in long term storage, essentially waiting to be scrapped (and scrapping/storage costs money, about $5-7 billion each year is spent on decommisssioning) or was out of date (minitions have an expiry date, as any one buying bullets knows), It was a sunk cost, relating to a budget spent when Ronnie Reagan was president. Some of the value has been based on replacement costs. Other moneys is not sent to Ukraine; its sent to US factories, and goes into the pockets of C-Level, shareholders, workers. Some is returned to government as tax. A portion is spend on logistics, reimbursing the US Airforce for fuel. But there are extra savings, because now the pilots don't have to spend so long training at 100% taxpayer expense. Its like you have a $1000 car. It runs ok, ok for A to B, but the seats are worn out, the rust is starting to peep through. You want a new car and want to treat yourself to a new $40,000 car, and want to trade your old car in. The dealer isn't all that interested in a $1000 banger, it will go straight to recycling anyhow. He would have given you $1000 discount anyhow, as you are a cash buyer. Your neighbour has spent his life savings treating his youngest for cancer, and had to sell his car to pay the bills. So he can't get to work. So you decide to help him give him your old car. It ain't pretty, but it works, you had looked after it.He's very happy. A few months later, you approach the neighbour asking him for the $39,000 you had to spend on buying a new car. He doesn't have the money, so you suggest taking half his garden, and then you move on to the question of his daughters, and how old they are, as you need a new wife.