JonnyF

Just do what the doomsday cultists do. Pretend to be concerned, pontificate, then carry about your daily life without making any changes whatsoever. If you want to be an elitist doomsday cultist, take 50+ private jets per year, buy several beachside mansions (despite preaching about rising sea levels) and buy carbon credits as a virtue signal. Job's a good 'un. Some turkeys will vote for it as this thread shows. Talk is cheap.

That video is the worst porno I've ever seen.

You know you have problems when you have Hunter Biden trying to convince people of your innocence. A bit like having Jeffrey Epstein as a character reference.

Good idea. The classroom is a place of learning, not a place for LGBT propaganda.

If Meghan Markle is black then that's a pretty serious case of cultural appropriation. Seriously though, nobody cares that she is mixed race. They care that she is a nasty piece of work who not content with ripping apart her own family, now tries to do the same with Harry's.

The ruling is correct. He can have protection when on royal duty (which he chose to give up). No need to provide it while he swans around the world on private jets merching his imagined victimhood. Get your own wallet out and hire some goons, same as the Kardashians do.

He can hire private security if he thinks his comments about killing Taliban members will come back to bite him. Why should Trump provide it?

If Harry has a target on his back it will most likely be The Taliban after he bragged about his kill count in his revengeful book of fiction, Spare. Trump has no responsibility to protect The Markles any more than he has a duty to protect Hugh Grant. You can't quite your job and expect to keep the benefits. If Harry was a bit smarter he would have known that.

Wow this is serious. We better fly all the elites to an opulent conference to make some speeches about the proles needing to pay more tax. Better still, could someone call Harry on his private jet and ask him to buy some carbon credits ASAP. Before his polo match kicks off would be preferable.

Another loss for Harry. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/28/prince-harry-loses-high-court-challenge-to-personal-security-downgrade Seems like nobody wants to give him something for nothing. Biting the hand that feeds him appears to have been a bad idea. Who knew? He must rue the day he met that Markle woman.

I believe the scorpion and the frog fable pretty much sums up why.

Why don't you Google it? Oh... wait a minute...

Of course this is only deemed a problem because the results have portrayed non whites in a negative light. Had a search for Idi Amin returned the image of a portly white man with an orange hue and a blonde quiff they'd have thought it was absolutely brilliant. Oh look, how 'progressive'. Wonderful. Much like selective objections to cultural appropriation, they only object to such factual errors in one direction. The ridiculousness of these AI results demonstrates perfectly the ridiculousness of Woke ideology.

I hope the local fire brigade is up to the task.

It's not an easy fix because there is no will within Google to fix it. They have long suppressed search results that contradict their leftist world view.

Hardly a surprise. The UK Labour party also has a long history of anti-semitism. In fact, Australia seems to be repeating many of the mistakes that is currently destroying the UK. Sad to see.

There is no need for Trump to protect Harry like the current administration does. Markle has no links to the Republicans, unlike the many 'friends' she has in the Democrats. Plus Trump had a lot of respect for the Queen and the Royal Family while Harry has been trashing them to pay for his extravagant lifestyle of private jets, mansions and Range Rover motorcades while claiming to be a climate activist. Interesting that the main defense for Harry's admission of drug taking in his book Spare appears to be that his book was actually a pack of lies. Well, quelle surprise!! Many of us have been saying that since it came out. https://nypost.com/2024/02/24/us-news/prince-harrys-drug-use-claim-in-spare-not-proof-he-took-drugs-lawyer-says-he-may-have-lied-to-sell/

I've found the same thing with Google. Often I will search for articles that I know exist, but if the article isn't in line with Google's world view it simply doesn't show up on the search. It's still there on the internet, but Google doesn't return it. I very much suspect they are doing the same with certain articles that show Islam in a poor light, in the name of "stopping hate speech" or one of the other phrases the left disingenuously uses to suppress any views that are not in line with their own. As I said on another thread, it's a case of the left condoning Islamist extremism/intolerance in the name of diversity and inclusion. Deeply ironic.

Great news. A revolting character. Good riddance.

"Occasional verbal slips"? The man can barely string a sentence together. He confuses Mexico with Egypt. He stumbles around mumbling. It's bordering on elder abuse now. Difficult to watch at times. The "angry old man" shouting at reporters routine is a bad idea and doesn't convey the strong image he thinks it does. It just looks like Grandpa waving his stick and telling the kids to get off his lawn. It will only get worse by November. The deterioration appears to be accelerating. They need to act now.

Lindsay Hoyle should step down. Cozying up with the leader of the opposition was pathetic. I didn't think anyone could be more biased than Bercow but it seems Hoyle has achieved that. Jog on Lindsay, put a fork in him, he's done. As for the poor little MP's feeling threatened by the Islamist protesters, well, you made the bed now you can lie in it. I guess they never expected the threat to be on the doorstep of their leafy Islington streets or Westminster. They thought it was only the common man in the poorer suburbs that would suffer, while they patted each other on the back, quoffed another glass of Champagne and congratulated themselves on creating such a wonderfully diverse society. They're not so brave when they have to face the reality of the consequences of their policies and inaction.

Nothing. I don't need to. I choose to. Because I am responsible. I understand that some people don't like dogs and my dog is really friendly but also 35 kgs. Some people don't want a 35kg dog trying to play with them so I don't allow that to happen out of respect for them. Same reason I don't let him bother our builders. I had a really sweet chocolate Labrador when I lived in Phuket which I used to take to the beach as a pup. One day when it was around 6 months old it saw a child (I guess 6-7 years old) playing in the sand and ran over to play with it. The child was laughing but the Thai mother was absolutely terrified. I'd assumed nobody could possibly be scared of a 6 month old Chocolate Lab pup but just because there was no danger, didn't mean she didn't feel threatened. Here is a pic from around that time at Kata beach to demonstrate how harmless she looked. So after that I bought an extendable lead. But not because she was dangerous. So address the issues with the owners. Then we'll have more stories like this that popped up on my feed earlier about how dogs can bring out the best in autistic children.

I wonder if they offered them 4,000 Baht each thinking they were actually women. Then they got started and found the additional hardware and offered them 2,000 Baht for all 3 to clear off? If I were them, that would be my story anyway .

Well as a Libertarian I'm hardly going to be supporting huge state interference in people's lives, am I? Not sure what this "pittie" is that you speak of, but no children are at risk from my American PitBull Terrier. Because I am a responsible owner who has trained and socialized their dog and doesn't allow him to roam free unsupervised. Speed limits are OK in certain areas, like around schools etc. I have no issues with the German Autobahns where there are no speed limits. The key is to train and educate the drivers, much like with dog ownership. The problem with the nanny state is that it breeds individuals who cannot think or take responsibility for themselves. Meaning you need even more laws to keep them in check. It's a vicious circle that results in deeply authoritarian societies. If you want so much state control over people's lives, rules and regulations etc. I'm quite surprised you choose to live in Thailand. Maybe you'd be better suited to China?

Protect the public from itself? Nanny state nonsense. "Society at risk" . Hyperbole much? This is simply going after low hanging fruit to try and score some political points. Pathetic from Sunak. If he wanted to make a real difference to lives he'd make a real effort on knife crime, not ban a specific breed of dog.