Roadsternut

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckgk391yzm7t

Are all gun owners potential terrorists? Of course not. But mass shootings in the United States are now an almost daily event. To minimise the risk of injury/death to innocent poeple, it's important to remove all Gun Owners from our community. because (unfortunately), the Gun Owning community has failed to 'police' itself, failed to police extremist gun enthusiasts and fantacists, failed to police extremist gun owning militias in their gun clubs, failed to hand over those with unsafe handling practices and dodgy views to the police etc. Basically, the gun owning community has brought hatred/fear of guns upon themselves, and as a result, innocent gun owners will suffer. As for me, I wouldn't want to live within 10 miles of a gun owner, and I manage to do that by living in the United Kingdom.

Welsh miners settled in the Donbas

But you'll be dead by then, so why does it matter to you? On average, gasoline cars in the US make it to 13 years, 150,000. Then the subframes fail, the bonded bushes go out, the $2000 clutch and flywheel wear out. The car rots away. Cars have been throw away since year dot. Thats why you have scrapyards full of them. Those Ford Cortinas would barely get to 5 years before the front fenders gave out. My old man told me his 1956 Ford Prefect needed a new engine at 30k miles.

Based on prejudice, aka, lick a finger and stick it in the air. When the Toyota Prius first appeared, Parkers, the Used Car value bible, had to model out the depreciation rate. They asked Toyota how long was the hybrid battery warrantied for. Toyota put a 10 year, 150k warranty on them, and, back then, a £5000 plus labour replacement. Labour to replace, compared to a short block installation, was relatively low. Parker took a view that at 10 years old, the Prius would be effectively worthless, and no one would be spending £5000 on them. So depreciation rates were estimated based on that assumption. As it proved, those Prius batteries actually lasted a lot longer than what Toyota thought, and when these cars got old, the aftermarket stepped in with very imaginative solutions, involving swapping out reclaimed cells, to keep elderly Priuses with 500k on the clock still running. ICE engines fail regularly in service. When Mazda launched the Renesis engined RX8, they supplied a small bottle of oil with the spare wheel. Rotaries use oil, and as an owner, you are supposed to check and top up the oil every other fuel stop. The Renesis had better rotor tips than previous Wankel engines, but ultimately it was still garbage, with poor fuel consumption and emissions. But Mazda tried to push it onto the fleet market, and a sporty number for those reps. Guess what, the reps decided it wasn't their job to keep the pil topped up. A saw a lease car in getting a new short engine under warranty; the driver ran it for 3 months with an oil light showing. The rotor looked like someone had thrown bearings into it. Luckily a brand new Renesis is only £800 from Mazda; a new Thai built Mitsubishi V6 diesel is more like £13k (albeit long engine). More recent engine designs, peak ICE I suppose, are showing catastropic reliability, due to shifting patterns of ownership. I would not touch a wetbelt engine (cambelt engines where the belts are in an oil bath to promote efficiency). These are fitted to cars where most of the first owners are on a lease, sticking to manufacture oil changes. But to drive the economics of leasing, the service intervals (oil change) is being extended out to 20k miles. New oils aren't doing well with these new belts. The oil softens and breaks up the belt, leading to clogging of the oil strainer, leading to oil starvation. Belt intervals are typically 40-50k miles, but these cars are typically off lease by then, and onto the used market, where the next owner is upgrading from a 10-20 year old car. But wet belt change isn't £200-300 to change like a normal belt, its more like £1000+ up, so sticker shock. And then you have the Ingeniums; they can develop timing chain stretch pretty quick, but you need to get the gearbox off to change; the chain is at the back of the engine!. EVs will change the nature of the workshop. People are going to find skills obsolete. People don't decoke engines nor reset valve clearances anymore. There are now EV tuners such as Rich Rebuilds. When ICE engines go wrong its usually something like coolant failure (HGF) or oil starvation (big end, rings). With EV, the major issue is grounds. Corroded connectors lead to garabade running. Couple that with incompetant technicians who's problem solving skills are limited. They've been working on petrol and diesels since college, then did the 4-6 week conversion course on EVs. Give it time, and you will see a decent cohort of EV mechanics with the 10-15 years of working on them. Some typical scenarios. 10 year old abused BMW i3; typical of one of the "better" early EVs. The batteries are fine. The issue is the 3 cylinder range extender motor, and no one bothering to service it Fisker. A typical future scenario; an orphan car, with zero manufacturer support (Fisker used an unwanted Chinese design, then went bankrupt). This is a pretty likely scenario, given we are back to the early days of the car, when there were a kazillion different car brands. Guess what, its just mechanics. Things will be fine. Fixing a cheap hybrid Cadillac

Attrition of RHD A2s has been pretty horrific. Lots of gearbox and electrical issues. While the aluminum spaceframe construction means less rust (though that in itself means any knock will condemn the car, as no one can fix it anymore). If you analyse for the base A2 model, there has been a 84% attrition rate since 2006; the Mercedes A-Class is worse, being all but extinct, but like the A2, this was also a ridiculously complicated car. On the other hand, for 2001-2006 VW Polos, more than half are still on the oad. A far better small car. If you dig into MOT pass rates, the Audi A2 isn't too bad, @ 55% (cheapie Polo is 47%); what condemns these Audis is not really failure of safety or emissions related items, but due to the high cost of ownership. They were unreliable, costly to maintain. Replacing the clutch, for instance, using Audi parts, would be more than what the car is worth. After 2002, Audi switches to cheap pressed control arms which just rot through. The packaging of the battery under a fake floor leads to nighmare leakage problems. Again, being an aluminium construction leads in itself to electrical issues. The grounds are set to the body, but the bolts etc are steel, setting up galvanic corrosion. A 3-cylinder engine is naturally unbalanced, so its not a relaxing drive. That fancy construction also meant higher insurance than its peers. I had a TDI Sport for a while with 40k miles. Not a month went past without something breaking. Couldn't wait to get rid of it. Had a few other Audis along the way. they all go the same way; hit a certain age and self destruct. POS car for non-car guy badge snobs. RW MPG on a diesel is 50mpImpg, if you had the 1.6, its more like mid-30s. The 1.2 was a gutless wonder. Americans would hate it. The 1.6 FSI has a special place in hell. The Honda Jazz (knownas Fitta in some markets, vulgar Swedish name for female genetalia) is a better proposition id you like a 20 year old Minivan look.

No, a murderous attack committed by two nutters. A religion doesn't commit anything, any more than catholicism was responsible for terrorist outrages. A "religion of peace" hero saved many lives. We need to be shouting that over and over again. Don't give the attackers any legitimacy, if they believe they are committng a massacre, breaking the Commandments from God, in the name of God/Allah. Its a fig leaf. Ironically, when it comes to America gun massacres s eem to be reduced to "in other news...". The 2018 Pittsburgh Synagogue massacre was perpertrated by a bloke, Robert Bowers, quoting the bible and calling the Jews "children of satan". Abortion clinic attacks are rarely, if ever, committed by agnostic people. When Branton Tarrant live streamed himself slaughtering innocents in that mosque in New Zealand, what was his motivation? Religion? Careful, many say to be anti-Muslim is not to be racist. The murderers likely had no direct link to events on the other side of the world. They likely wanted to influence those events, to give their pathetic empty lives validity. The absolutely wrong reaction is for this attack to affect the policies of any other country besides Australia, whether that is concessions or reprisals. You elevate them, give them a platform in death.

Its a pity Australia no longer awards the George Medal or Knighthoods. Instead, he'll get the "Cross of Valour". If he ever has to work a day in his life again, its an injustice. Never held a gun in his life. Runs the local fruit shop. Guaranteed he'll be sold out tomorrow. His name means "to praise" or "to honour". Epitomised the best of Australia. True courage. https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-880304

A 20 year old documentary, where you hear just the same old arguments, but talking about different kinds of immigrants. You know things aren't going to end well with the Manleys of Kent....Her dad's old Offie was now a Chinese Take Away. She wasn't too pleased to learn Mongol hoardes featured in her past. Gary Bushell, Sun columnist, finds out he's 8% African, likely from an event in the last 5-6 generations. Takes it quite well. The Founder of the Steadfast Trust, who mourn the death of King Harold, and mark the genocide of the Anglo Saxons by the Normans, (1066 meant Grown Zero, Ethnic Cleansing for her) was told she had a lot of Ukrainian/Georgian/Armenian, but also had a typical profile of a Romani. She tried to sue the show. Some people had different definitions of what it is to be "English". For some, you need to demonstrate a lineage of 1000 years (about 40 generations). That particular individual found out she was mostly not English, with substantial Middle Easter/Indian roots, which she used to explain why she tanned quite well. She took it well to be told her roots were probably Turkey/the Balkans. Essex man was ok with 12 generations as proof of being English. He was pretty sure no descendant of England and Arsenal legend Ian Wright could never be considered English. When confronted with being 60% not Northern European, he toned that down to 3-4 generations. Looked a bit shocked. Leicester man (trainee squadee) defined Englishness about how much you contribute to society and shared values. He had ambitions to join the army, and defined the English Soldier through TESTICLES (teamwork enthusiasm stamina initiative courage loyalty excellence sense-of-humour). That's probably a very reasonable view. Magnus Magnusson had a name as least English as you could suppose, but as a kid, I had no clue where he was from. And actually, it didn't really matter. He influenced my view of the world. Leicester man was really pleased to learn genetically he was typically Russian-Ukrainian. I know my (maternal) lineage about 15-20 generations, but after that, it runs out of steam. Genetically, one test shows me, like Lord Tebbit, to have a fairly boring background; 47% English (mostly East Midlands), 49% Irish (mostly Munster), 4% Franco-German and a smidgen of Viking (Iceland 1%). My paternal background only goes back to about 1780, because London (London drew a lot of people looking for work, my surname is strongly associated with the North East). Given my oldest London ancestor was a retired British soldier, I was rather hoping for something a bit more interesting; a soldier born in the Empire perhaps. But no. Those results aren't really comparable to the TV show; in the source I used, I am being compared to the known ancestry of other living people submitting samples, which will skew things a little. Other databases are based on more ancient samples, so you are compared to signatures identified at archeological sites. In those, I have links to a bronze age site in Befordshire, but also ancient Rome, as well as the shores of the Black Sea. Society does change. My values are not the same as my late father; similar, but not the same. And the same would be true for him and his father. My grandfather achieved adulthood during the Great Depression. My father's formative years included the death of his mother when he was a young teenager, and then National Service, turned into regular service. My formative years were affected by his choice of job (army, so I was mostly outside of the UK in MEA/APAC), The change in British (English) society is most profound when I look at my mother's side. I can take it back to the 1500s. That could done, relatively easily, because for 500 years, her family basically didn't move from the same village, and they didn't change job much either. On my dads side, on London, its a history of working in crap jobs in South London then crap jobs in the East End. That changed dramatically with the First and, more so, the Second World War. Huge changes in society. My Great Grandfather was born in a Workhouse, to a 17 year old chamber maid. He joined the Dragoons aged 14 to get away from his step dad. He served in Egypt, France (first and last cavalry charges) and Ireland. At the end of it he was grateful to get a job labouring at the new iron works in his home town. His sons got jobs there. War came along, and one son became a Royal Marine, and turned that into a career, saw the world. My Grandfather was in a protected profession (boilermaker) and had to be content with Home Guard, as a young man. Postwar, became head of the town's Civil Defence (Cold War stuff). His daughter, my mum, joined up at16, as an army nurse. Me, PhD, Director within a Plc. 4 generations from Workhouse to Boardroom (or nearly). Thats not a complement to the opportunities British society offered. Its damming. 500 years of farm workers and leather scrapers, then the upper classes get killed off, and now they need us. I can only reflect that my ancesters from before 1900 were just as capable as me, but were denied opportunity. When my Grandparents went to War, they were told they were defending British (English) values, and if necessary, dying for those values. But some of those values weren't worth defending, and they didn't survive. That generation established new values. We no longer dof caps and accept our place in society. I recommend everyone who can, research your family history. Uncover the lost brother, the family scandals. For most people of a working class background, you will feel just a bit communist, in the sense of put them up agaisnt the wall, and shoot them. I identify as a Thatcherite, in the sense of a follower of a Grocer's Daughter who has to fight against lack of opportunity and prejudice. Rather that than the son of a rich man, who had the opportinity but squandered it in life (Jeremy Corbyn, politically mediocre, nothing more than a bolshie council leader, who benefited from a private education).

Who was the stain-down-his-mums-pants that laughed at this?

Russia the War Monger moves the Peace Goal Posts yet again. They want to keep fighting to the last Gopnik it seems. https://www.is.fi/ulkomaat/art-2000011687044.html Lavrov has conveyed to his Finnish opposite number the demand that Finland and Sweden leave NATO as a pre-condition to peace. Putin has to keep the war going otherwise he knows his corpse is going to be found in flagrante with his favourite horse, with a bayonet up his rectum.

Maybe add this option; https://www.freenationsrf.org/en https://www.freenationsrf.org/en/news-posts/russia-on-the-brink-of-fragmentation-2025

This poll is public. I am not responding.

The media is generally reporting these photos to be all innocuous. But to give him his due, Roger Stone is on the ball (though maybe he's stealing someone elses thunder). https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-560w,f_avif,q_auto:eco,dpr_2/rockcms/2025-12/251212-steve-bannon-jeffrey-epstein-cs-f5c7a5.jpg On Epstein's desk are two photos, both redacted (they were looking hard at these photos). One appears to show a woman slumped on a sofa, placed very close to the edge of the desk, near Bannon. Bannon is in conversation with Epstein, after Epstein's initial arrest. Some say this is an Ipad showing a livestream. Others think its faked. Bannon planned a documentary on Epstein, and there is apparently 15 hours of unaired footage from interviews in Epstein's office, held by Bannon. This I suppose is why there are these photos appearing. There were people going around the office, the house, snapping off the cuff moments with Bannon, Allen and others.

Jewish. She is from a particular sect that wears Burkas.

Yeah, its like people assuming Riclag is English, when he's actually portraying all the behaviours and attitudes of a dumb Redneck, returning froma Cross Burning, on his way to a Lynchin'. I get it. The I am Sparticus scene was a Hollywood invention in reaction to the MaCarthyite era.

But that's the point. If the reporting is correct, its legislation that targets one particular religion, one particular gender. But what right does the state have in how parents raise their children? Ban home schooling next? Another example of the political circle, where the so-called "far right" starts mimicing the so-called far left in the objectives, and vice versa. Children don't have freedom of choice, because they are children. If they have freedom of choice, then they should be able to smoke, drink, fool around, all the stuff that adults do. When proud parents take that baby to be christianed, are they imposing their choices on the child. Should christianing ceremonies be banned for under 14s. Circumcision? That could be banned outright, but not because of some religious objection. The ban isn't on headscarves per se. Its a ban specifically at scarves worn "in the Islamic tradition". Headscarves worn for other reasons are absolutely fine. Expect lots of 13 year old Austrian girls to suddenly have bad hair days. The law voted on is twisted. The law should be giving the freedom to the child, when they are of an age to make a choice, to remove that scarf, turban, crucifix, without fear of punishment, admonishment etc. And that extends to any choice of a legal activity. ie a 15 year old saves up to get a full sleeve tatoo. Parents cannot ground them for doing so. In most countries, parents cannot physically beat their children, but they can incarcerate their children without due process, and for arbitrary reasons ("go to your room", "my house, my rules" etc). The same politicians voting on this no doubt all think that children shouldn't have the choice of gender reassignment, to have sex, to smoke, to drink, to sniff glue, to go out on dates with strange young men, to run around a swimming pool, to dive in head first in the shallow end, to get a BB gun for Christmas, to hurt the puppy, to spit at other children, to swear like a Trooper.

She is Jewish.

FYI, she is a member of the Haredi sect, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish sect. What she is wearing is referred to in Yiddish as a Frumka. They believe that jewish women must not expose their skin to anyone but their husbands. This is confusing imagry for some https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/the-jewish-taliban-controversial-sect-dismisses-child-neglect-allegations

Roger Stone hates Steve Bannon

There are a lot of German Russians. In theory, there are also Welsh Russians.

Conflating indifference with "liking". Conflating UK with India. The UK's beliefs would likely be more similar to Ireland, than India or Mozambique, but you pigeonhole people, likely because of Anglophobic feelings. Why are you interested in knowing where people are from, and their attitudes towards Putin's Russia? Why did you decide to segregate the UK from the Republic of Ireland? Its about supporting your prejudiced view about the role of the UK with respect to Russia's criminal aggression towards its neighbours. Its an attempt to divide and rule, to put Americans and "Europeans" on one side, and the British, and by extension anyone from Australia/New Zealand/South Africa because they are all the same in your world view. The survey isn't really about a genuine exploration of attitudes towards Russian culture. Its more about dividing the forum based on your own prejudices.

Imagine the conversation in classroom. The female teacher is wearing a headscarf. She might be muslim, or she might be Orthodox Jew. The child is a muslim child. At the weekends, and when out with her parents, she wears a headscarf. But when she goes to school, she has to leave it off. She asks the teacher why she wears a headscarf. Whether Jewish or Muslim, its a similar story, related to modesty. The teacher might explain that in other countries, the little girl can wear the headscarf if she wants, but in Austria, she doesn't have that freedom, because the government believes her parents' beliefs are wrong. The little girl asks why her classmate, little Rohit, is allowed to wear that turban. The teacher doesn't really have an answer for that. People who are adherants to that religion have been associated with terrorist outrages (Air India over the Atlantic etc). She asks why Adam is allowed to wear his skullcap. Again, the reasoning isn't clear. Adam is forever complaining about his skull cap, it keeps falling off, and other kids take the piss out of him over it. She starts thinking the government doesn't treat people all equally. The girl goes home thinking her parents' values are wrong, because the government says so. She decides to start smoking behind the bikesheds. He parents now have no moral standing, why should she take any notice of them, because the government tells her they are wrong.

He's talking ballocks. Sat in a corner of Thailand, realising he's running out of money, so lashes out with racist sentiment.

What religion is this lady?