JAG

Yes, put bluntly, entirely self centred and absolutely no empathy.

I use one of those halogen ovens, glass bowl with heating element and controls in the lid. No plastic coatings to worry about, easy to clean and does the same thing. Mind you, I am sure that I saw somethingabout halogen bulbs being phased out or banned a while back, plenty available on Lazada. Never tried to use one whilst swimming underwater though!

Whilst I agree that Putin wants the Baltic States back under Russian control, may I be geographically pedantic and point out that Tajikistan is a landlocked country in central Asia, and rather a long way from the Baltic Sea. I do hope that you have nothing to do with the USA's penchant for dropping bombs on people...

Here we go again - your obsession with faeces is becoming tedious!

Umh, no. I don't think it was clueless, I thought it was quite a carefully formed opinion, certainly one which would merit discussion rather than abuse! That is why I framed it as a question. Interestingly none of those who commented adversely have made any attempt to rebut my suggestion. The emptiness of your response in particular does seem to be rather backed up by general reaction to your post.

I suspect the result may be somewhat " looser" affiliations between some if not all States. This may well driven by a lack of financial co-operation. If the wealthier " blue" States have their Federal funding and or spending cut, through political vindictiveness, then I can certainly imagine a reluctance to contribute. California is perhaps the most likely example, but it is a general pattern that in federal funding, blue States are generally the contributors, red States the benefited. Increased economical and fiscal independence, rather than full succession? "Pacifica" and "Atlantica" are somewhat fanciful, as is States joining "Canada". That said certainly the West Coast States, and some perhaps in the North East and bordering on Canada might welcome closer economic and trade links with Canada and indeed the rest of the world, able to ignore the chaotic and damaging posturing on trade and tariff matters of the current Federal Administration. Many of the roles of the Federal Government would of course have to be re-evaluated, but States already have their own judicial and policing frameworks, and the current administration seems determined to hand responsibility for education, healthcare and social provision to the States. Military funding and the size of the armed forces would have to be reduced - in itself, perhaps not such a bad thing! Wouldn't it be ironic if a freer, more democrat, less controlled and perhaps more liberal United States were to emerge from the ruins of the one which President Trump and his gang seem hell bent on destroying!

Interesting term - "uneducated". In this context what does it mean? Not agreeing with you, or whatever "party line" you may follow? Having the temerity to consider what is being reported, in open media sources, and having considered it, then daring to form and express an opinion? Again, does expressing such an opinion constitute "breeding misinformation and trouble"?

I have had the misfortune of being treated by the Thai health system on a regular basis over the past few years. Not once, never, have I suffered anything remotely like this. I have always been treated like everyone else in the hospital.

Well, I suppose at least we know where you are coming from! Mind you, I suspect a number of us rather suspected that already.

Well, he should know, after all, he has long been " close" to the Army! In past years the "Eastern Tigers", a society of officers from the units based along the Cambodian border were the power focus in the Army. More recently a different group, with umh, more specific loyalties, have been ascendant. It makes for interesting speculation about the handling of the recent border fracas!

Extraordinary! Especially the brown ones eh?

Last medical test for a driving licence, I was sat in the waiting room, doctor opened a sliding hatch, looked me up and down from a range of 5 metres; 5 minutes later his receptionist handed me the completed form!

Rather obviously, yes.

In the last couple of months there has been a huge increase in the presence of "Federal Law Enforcement Agents" on the streets of the USA, or more accurately the streets of areas which do not perhaps follow the particular agenda of the current administration. They are distinguished by almost complete "racial homogeneity" - put bluntly almost all white males - ad hoc equipment which seems to suggest that they have largely provided their own kit, no badges, no uniforms, unmarked vehicles, masks of course, and behave in a way that suggests no knowledge of the law or police training. Many do not seem to have undergone any sort of physical training and from time to time have been caught both making comments which betray political motivations and engaging in open racial brutality. One can't help but wonder where this sudden increase in available manpower has come from, it is difficult not to imagine a "levée en masse" of right wing militias.

There is an alternative view. This and several other allegations were made. Some very powerful people, with an awful lot of money, made sure they were buried. Not exactly an unknown phenomenon on the American political scene. Epstein's inadequately explained but very well publicised death may also resonate.

The Biden administration had the Epstein files for four years. They chose not to release them. The conclusion that they wished to protect various people within their camp is inescapable. The Trump administration now has the files. They campaigned on the grounds of releasing them, the most salient details, the list of Epstein's closest contacts and "players" were stated to "be on the Attorney General's desk", then she claims there are no lists, then we hear that a huge task force of 1,000 FBI agents has been assembled to ensure that references to Donald Trump are removed from these files/lists (which do not exist). Add to the mix Mr Trumps own chaotic, strident and persistent attempts to deny any involvement, and a multitude of very obvious and increasingly desperate deflection tactics, and it really is very difficult to avoid drawing the same conclusions! The only way to solve the whole matter is to release all the evidence into the public domain. They won't - which leads to the inescapable conclusion that Trump is in it up to his neck.

If anything were to be made of it, if it were to be taken up, there would inevitably be a tragic accident. The stakes are as high as they could be.

1,000 FBI agents, working on 100,000 pages of documents. That is, by any measure, a massive undertaking, a huge cover up. It took place on "Trumps watch" (time in office, not the ones he is selling - have any of those materialised yet by the way?). Trumps name, and others were removed " because at the time they were private citizens!" Give me strength, couldn't even the clown car collection of buffoons who are running this <deleted>show come up with a better cover story than this? Such cover ups on such a scale, inevitably fail; this one will. And when it does it will absolutely rock the very foundations of the political system in the USA, and likely other countries. The amount of effort going into it, and the scale of the undertaking, together with the massive fortune which Epstein built, seemingly out of nowhere, suggests compellingly that many of the powerful and wealthy, private citizens or not, were involved. We know Trump was involved, we know Prince Andrew was involved, there are strong suggestions that Bill Clinton was involved (although his high political profile at the time, and his concomitant Secret Service cover may make that less likely - I would bet he wished he was, right up his street!) It is very likely, almost certain, others with money, influence and power were involved, and politics, business and money are so intertwined now in the US that the ramifications will be far reaching. Maybe it will break the hold of the oligarchy? Who knows. The cover up will fail, the truth will leak out, and when it does it will be quick and dramatic. I doubt that Trump will stand trial, he is too old, the evidence will be too redacted and otherwise too interfered with to be relied on in court, and certainly the current Department of Justice would never act. Even a future Democrat led administration, unless it is extremely radical, would I suspect not have the stomach for it, perhaps the Latina hottie from the Bronx would act, but it is probable that the house of cards would have collapsed before she will be in a position to do anything - more is the pity! The shame it would bring upon the Office of President is simply unimaginable. So Trump will escape, and his fellow players in the "filthy game" will slink off into the shadows. If there were to be a trial, or a massive public investigation, perhaps that new gilded ballroom that they are planning to build onto the White House would be just the venue?

Others may be thinking about the "secret ballot aspect". Then of course there is the " making voting difficult in certain areas" aspect - reducing the number of voting places for certain communities, forbidding water to those in long queues and so on. Mind you, just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to voter suppression in the world's leading democracy!

The Ukraine constitution, I believe, precludes elections whilst a significant proportion of the country, both geographically and in terms of their population under foreign occupation. By the way, I am not a lefty, or if I am, then maybe we can agree that you are a fascist?

Does America grow turnips, or are they now amongst the foods which they have to import, and on which the American consumers are having to pay tariffs?

Mind you he did get elected, quite convincingly, in a free election.

I say, that is a bit harsh, I am sure that he still has in mind "concepts of a plan for healthcare". After all Rome wasn't built in a day, mind you it only took a few days for the Gauls to sack it in 396BC. Mind you the French always were a bit impetuous!

My opinion of Donald Trump is well known here, but I do think it is unfair to refer to Melanie Trump as the "first prostitute". The relationship between them is, to say the least, enigmatic, and certainly money played a part in it. At the time she and Trump "hooked up" she was making her way in the USA, looking to build a career for herself and apparently to provide a secure future, for herself and her parents. She was, willingly or unwillingly sucked into the whole unsavoury business. The offer of the visa and the concomitant relationship with Trump offered her what she was looking for, and she took it. Given his prior record, and his lifestyle she clearly didn't expect it to last as long as it does. I actually feel rather sorry for her - I wouldn't go so far as to say I have a "soft spot" for her, that by many accounts is firmly in her husbands domain, but I do acknowledge that she is trapped, and perhaps humiliatingly so.

No I haven't, and no I'm not.