Roadsternut

Lenin is popularly considered to have referred to "useful idiots" (he never did), but we know what is meant by that. When you stay you are "100% Pro-Russian", that says a lot about you. You complain about being called pro-Russian, but then say you are pro-Russian.

A lot of Belgians in WW2 supported Hitler. What's "true blood Belgian"; some of you speak French, some speak Flemish. Not a real country.

When a Police officer signs up to the job, they know the rules. Another job setting where people can be punished, quite harshly, for minor infractions, is the armed forces. Failure to provide a breath test for a civvie will typically result in loss of driving licence and a fine. In the army, it gets you 51 weeks in prison. If you fail to support the police when asked, 2 years inside. Overfill the petrol tank; dismissed with disgrace (lose your job). Drunk on duty could get you 2 years in th Glass House. Pulling a sickie, 2 years inside. etc. Similarly the medical profession, where a single error can lead you to losing your livelihood. Generally, we are glad this happens.

"Gypsy" is a corruption of "Egyptian", because thats where people thought they came from. The Roma are descended from Northern India. Pikey is a derogatory word to descibe Roma. Yeah, you're a racist, and your posting fits with other numerous statements you've said on the forum. Maybe you're not, and you just state these things here to wind people up/for the clicks/likes/hates. Mormon is a religion. Chav is a co-opted Roma word. Toff merely represents the upper class, possibly in reference to an adornment worn by Oxford graduates.

His political beliefs are irrelevant. He was likely emotionally and mentally vulnerable, probably groomed online. On Christmas day 2021, a young man broke into Windsor castle, armed with a crossbow. Three weeks earlier, he had downloaded an AI girlfriend, a bot. The bot encouraged him to kill the queen. It reinforced and magnified the murderous thoughts a disturbed young man was feeling. As an "AI girlfriend", the bot was trained to agree with him, to flatter him. Something very disturbing in the creators of this, that they believed that mimiced a relationship, that the role of women was to be willing and compliant. How a chatbot encouraged a man who wanted to kill the QueenThe case of Jaswant Singh Chail raises questions about the safety of AI-powered chatbots.

Morocco only accepts 8% of repatriations. No country on earth can be forced to accept people it doesn't want. That's what being sovereign means. Utimately, a country can deny the claimed identity. Thats why there are camps across Syria and Iraq full of fairly murderous people. Their own countries don't want them. Australia doesn't want their citizens back https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-16/australian-families-with-isis-links-leave-camp-in-syria/106351298 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-02-20/australian-women-who-lived-under-islamic-state-come-home-syria/104953800 Of course you could threaten countries to accept repatriations. They mght not care. You migh cut visas. They might not care. Or maybe you pay them

As I indicated before, Iran probably understands America better than America understands Iran. Worringly, America's version of an "Iran Watcher" seems to be the the Marxist-Islamist MEK party, reminiscent of the Iraqi "opposition" who seemed content on feeding a bunch of falsehoods. America, like all the democracies, is plain to see. There aren't shadowy personalities who are the realm strong pullers. If you go back to 1978-79, the Americans in Iran were genuinely not popular outside of the main cities. There is no evidence the opposition is particularly pre-American or even pro-Western. Ironically, the Iranian leader who was probably the closest to a Western idea of a politician was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; he was vociferously anti-Western, but that didn't mean he was in favour of a hermit Republic. He forged links with Hugo Chavez and Putin. And he was a thorn in the side of the clerics; he campaigned as a populist. Since then, the Iranian Presidents have been a revolving door of nobodies, and the Supreme Leader is really in control. And we don't really understand these Supreme Leaders. They aren't Kings, they are not like Emirs, they live in their own cleric city. To us, they seem a bit mystic. We don't really know who the men in suits sent to negotiate really represent, and what exactly is their brief or freedom to operate. But you would know who Ahmadinejad represented.

The Monroe Doctrine is something that the US made up, its not actually a thing in international law. Russia still maintains facilities in Cuba, and there are regular calls by its Navy in Havana, despite US protests. Ukraine is a European country. Russia is mostly not European. Sounds like you are in favour of the forcible reincorporation of the Baltic States.

I know what you are trying to refer to. But its a similar argument Hitler used to justify taking the Rhineland, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland; imagined slights againg the German people. Himmler invented an entire fake history of German Volk and Teutonic knights; sort of a combination of Ivanhoe meets the Teutonic Knights. He even had his own castle and "round table". Hitler invented a whole history to blame Germany's problems on Jewish people. It's no different now. And no, not Godwin's Law. Two small minded men pissed off with the world.

As I thought, likely a disturbed young man with a lot of troubles in his head. Ultimately, it is a tragedy.

He let himself down. The full report: https://www.btp.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/british-transport-police/misconduct/2026/btp-v-dc-luker-regulation-43-outcome.pdf He had been reported following the first quip. After he was charged, he spoke to a PC who was a Roma Community liasion to understand why the word he used was offensive. The panel claimed he used that knowledge in attempt to clean up his statement. He claimed he would never use such language in front of Travellers/Roma, but the panel rejected that. When officers join the police force, they are not judged according the standards held by the public, but to the Standards of Professional Behaviour. It didn't help his case by trying to claim PTSD caused him the repeatedly say offensive things to other officers, and then, essentially, lying under cross examination. He claimed he didn't know the word was offensive. The panel rejected that; he knew the word was offensive, in the same manner as being flippant with words such as S**bo, P**i, N*****r so forth.

We don't know the motive. The deceased had gone missing such that his family were worried about him acting out of character, and posted him missing. He lost his older sister 2-3 years ago to a reckless driver, in a fairly horrific car wreck. So you don't know that its political violence, versus someone who just wanted some attention, and ultimately suicide by cop.

The religious "courts" in the UK are sharia councils, the Beth Din, Sikh Courts, and Church of England consistory courts which operate alongside the national legal system, primarily handling civil, family, and religious matters via voluntary arbitration. All of these act under the Arbitration Act, only if both parties consent. These bodies have no statutory, binding authority that overrides UK law, which always takes precedence. Catholics don't get any special consideration; the Church of England is in charge of any Catholic marriages. The Puritans had abolished the Church's role in marriage, but this was reinstated some years after the Restoration. Religious councils cannot override UK law, and any decision made under religious law must be voluntary. These courts are forbidden from enforcing decisions or interfering in criminal matters. They are part of the UK's tradition of religious freedom, rather than a parallel legal system. It might be best to abolish any role any religion has in marriage, and make marriage purely a civil affair. Take God out of it.

Your observations indicate that Sunninbangrak probably thinks "gullible" doesn't appear in the OED.

Not true. While common law is a core, foundational element, it operates alongside, and is subordinate to, acts of Parliament (statute law). Acts passed by the UK Parliament, the Scottish Parliament, the Senedd (Welsh Parliament), and the Northern Ireland Assembly. Statute law overrides common law. English law is common to England and Wales. Scotland has their own law; try and sell a house there, and you'll find out.

You haven't seen how these flags are flown. As I predicted, what's left is tattered bits of polyester zip tied to lamp posts. Whoever put them up didn't their country, didn't respect the country. They are the same ilk as the knuckle draggers in Northern Ireland who, hang up tricolours or red hand flags, or sloppily painting lamp posts/kerbsones red white blue or green white orange. The instigators of this were seeking division, just like Northern Ireland, where the hoodlums treated flags in much the same way as a dog cocking its leg. I lived in Belfast for many years. As an outsider, trust me, those flags were divisive. The viral campaign (Flag Shaggers) over the summer was instigated by a shadowy group coming from Cyprus, who rocked up in York, apparently to pick up litter, then who quickly disappeared after a couple of GBN interviews. Joseph Moulton was a 22 year old (note age) who's Linkedin profile presented himself as a founder of a company called Geocapita, and founder of a Limassol company called Oberion, apparently a defence consultancy. In 2022, he founded H7 Commodities in the UAE. Seems a bit sus. Juggling A-levels while providing advice to governments. Now apparently flogging solar panels. Americans don't understand how the British relate to their flags. Americans don't understand the difference between country and nation. How a Unionist Scot will wave the Saltire as well as the Union flag. Its not the same as Americans. Our historical relationship with the military is also different. What happened was illustrative of the power of social media.

Not just a European trait, but in general, across the Anglo-Saxon world. https://www.gallup-international.com/survey-results-and-news/survey-result/fewer-people-are-willing-to-fight-for-their-country-compared-to-ten-years-ago The British Empire, at its peak, had a military that was mostly not British. Wellington at Waterloo, created multinational units; about 55% of the men under his command were not British. There is of course the Gurkhas. In France and Spain, there is the Foreign Legion, which recruits men of all nationalities, no question asked. The emergence of Armies mostly made up of citizens is quite recent, more of a 19th century trend. About 10 years ago the UAE switched to an almost entirely mercenary army (mostly Columbians), but most of those Gulf States had mostly British officers, not loan service individuals. In the US, there are about 700-800,000 foreign born veterans, with about 50,000 immigrants currently serving. Both the US and British armies are 5% immigrant. The Roman Legions of course were mostly not from what we would call Italy today. My brother did nearly 30 years, Bosnia, Iraqx3, Afghanistanx2. He met the flag waving American troops, who were mostly the minority. Most of the American troops he found were much like the British troops. The loyalty was less to country and head of State, more to your mates. The flag wavers tended to be the Billy No Mates teetotal bible bashers. Rory Stewart in his excellent account The Marches, where he walks along Hadrian's Wall, ruminating about history and its relationship to the present, described how the Dacians who built the Wall, could be compared to his own regiment, the Black Watch. How the Black Watch incorporated non-Scots, in much the same way as how the Dacians absorbed Britons. I don't find the statistics all that remarkable really. Remarkable perhaps to a people who have little to no history.

Small Prophets, from Mackenzie Crook, is a work of utter genius. Great turn from Michael Palin. Pearce Quigley is a revelation. Great reference to Modest Mouse. Cynics will hate it. https://youtu.be/CTAud5O7Qqk?si=FcFDce6Scp34imeB

Oh, that scene from the Hang Over Part 2

Let me guess, the OP will not read a single response on this thread.

I should add that VAT is applied at every stage of the value chain, reducing evasion. Sales taxes though are easy to evade. Tariffs don't just apply to finished goods, but also to subassemblies, so are analogous to VAT. Changes in VAT rates are approved by parliament. In the UK, the Chancellor presents their budget, where they might apply different VAT rates to goods, as needs require. But Parliament always votes on that budget. It need that oversight. Its a brave politician who campaigns on the premise of increasing regressive taxes. They usually don't win. No Taxation without Representation is Magna Carta stuff. But John Hampden is the one who should be credited to taking a stand against that. It drove him to civil war, and to pay the ultimate sacrifice.

Or any Trump-branded property. The danger, in terms of a response, is woud such attacks be directly related to the Tehran regime, or due to ideological sympathisers. In 2003, some parts of the US government were convinced Iraq was behind 911. President Bush was driven essentially by a personal vendetta (his father survived an assassination attempt), clouding his judgement). History will show that the Iraq War was a very costly mistake, resulting in the very opposite to a new world order.

The problem with a supreme confidence in any nation's counter-terrorism capabilities is summed up by the IRA's statement following the 1984 Conservative Conference bombing in Brighton. 911 was a "lucky once", and the resulting responses acted as a huge recruitment sergeant. with an outcome the US never anticipated. You are expressing hubris. And the Losses versus Gains, works if both sides have the same values, such as basically secular governments where no one in their right mind believes in life after death. But if one side views death as not an end, but a beginning, that threat holds less fear. Hitler probably knew that by kicking off WW2, there was a pretty good chance, things would not end well for Germany. He had seen the horrors of WW1. But his ideology taught him that some war was necessary, to further his ideological racial expansion. But he expressed fears about a two front war. Nevertheless, he started a two front war, thinking he might be able to win. Hubris. The Americans are exercising Gun Boat diplomacy. Often it works out. Sometimes its a complete disaster. The complete disaster might be the sinking of one or both of the US carriers. The relative exposure of aircraft carriers is something that has been debated for years, Sure, such an action will probably result in a huge response, but also shock to the US armed forces. Postwar, until 1982, western navies were considered relatively impregnable. The Falklands was the first proper post war naval battle, resulting in the loss of 7 ships of the line. Modern anti-ship weapons could penetrate a modern defence. It was through sheer luck that the Invincible wasn't lost, and insteead the MV Atlantic Conveyor was sunk. The Russian War of Aggression has shown the risks of littoral Naval warfare, with Russian combat ships exposed in shallow waters close to coastlines. Likely the US government doesn't understand the Iranian government as well as the Iranians understand the Americans. One side could be characterised as a death cult, where martyrs are celebrated. The other side mourns and weeps for its losses. Did Hamas anticipate the Israeli attack, after it attacked Israeli settlements. Quite probably, but they didn't fear it, because they effectively never gave up. Even the Nazis threw in the towel eventually. Iran might think, America can't defeat us. Which is true. America can't defeat Iran, in terms of taking over Iran. It couldn't do it in Iraq, a country with 20% of the Iranian population. A country with a ramshackle, rusting military, versus a country with a military that has become self sufficient. And that believes in the Afterlife and Skyfairies.

You're confused. Human Rights laws are universal. You're thinking of other laws. Cops in Thailand don't have the right to execute you on the spot, for instance.

Possibly because of what's happening now around the world just as a result of a partial release. The UK and Norwegian Royal families very survival is affected. At least one European government might fall. There are suggestions that international model agencies are nothing more than a front for human sex trafficing. Some say, let sleeping dogs lie, and it all should have died with Epstein. Governments cover up. Why have successve governments, of a range of different political hues, conspired in the JFK killing cover up? Why were the Pentagon papers covered up? Armenian Genocide? Gulf War Syndrome? Catholic Church sex abuse? Iran-Contras? Katyn? Flight 800? KAL 007? COVID-19 origins? 911? Roswell? Wikileaks? On one level, the files show a systemic infiltration and compromisation of almost every Western government by a foreign power, including groomng and attempted recruitment of key officials and public figures. Epstein is suspected to have been an agent for at least one foreign power, following on from his protege. The 45th President ran on a ticket saying he was going to expose a shadowy "Deep State" that controlled America. QAnon dropped hints about systemic cover ups.