.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png.8488ab72b8bb2e508209bfe3211b6e08.png)
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Latest posts...
-
2
Electrical wire question for my land
As with most things here, it's really entirely up to you. A few thoughts. Do you actually need a switch at the pump? A waterproof outlet on the pole may be better. If you do want a switch, would it be better/more convenient at the house end of the cable? Don't "extend" the pump cable, replace it with a suitable length of flexible cable in a conduit to protect it from the weather and UV. I wouldn't run underground unless you use underground rated cable (even if it's in conduit), underground conduit invariably fills with water no matter how carefully we seal the ends. The cable run from the house should be protected by an RCD if your installation doesn't already have one. All good fun 🙂 -
0
Russian Captain Identified in Cargo Ship Collision with US Tanker
The captain of the Solong cargo ship, which collided with a US oil tanker earlier this week, has been confirmed as a Russian national. Ernst Russ, the shipping company involved, verified on Wednesday that the 59-year-old captain was Russian, according to a report from Reuters. The incident occurred on Monday when the Portuguese-flagged Solong crashed into the US-flagged Stena Immaculate, a tanker carrying jet fuel, off the East Yorkshire coast. The collision left one crew member missing and raised concerns over potential environmental damage due to chemical leaks into the sea. Crowley, the company operating the Stena Immaculate, described the severity of the crash, stating there were "multiple explosions onboard." Footage from the aftermath captured thick black smoke pouring from the hull of the tanker. Search and rescue helicopters were dispatched, but despite extensive efforts, the search for the missing Solong crew member was eventually called off. Meanwhile, all 23 crew members aboard the US vessel were confirmed safe. Following the collision, Humberside Police arrested the Solong's captain on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter. Authorities have confirmed that he is cooperating with investigators. Detective Chief Superintendent Craig Nicholson stated: "Extensive work has already been carried out, and we are working closely with our partners to understand what happened, and to provide support to all of those affected. Following enquiries undertaken by my team, we have arrested a 59-year-old man on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter in connection with the collision. This follows the conclusion of search operations by HM Coastguard for the missing crew member of the SOLONG." Investigations are ongoing as authorities seek to establish the precise circumstances that led to the crash. Based on a report by The Standard 2025-03-13 -
0
The Age of Disclosure: A Documentary Unveiling the Truth About UFOs
A new documentary titled *The Age of Disclosure* has ignited debate by making an explosive claim: aliens are real, and the U.S. government has been covering up their existence for decades. The film, which had its world premiere at SXSW, features testimonies from 34 senior officials across the U.S. military, intelligence, and government sectors. It doesn’t just explore whether extraterrestrials exist—it questions why the government has kept this information hidden for so long and whether that secrecy has put the world at risk. The film’s director, Dan Farah, asserts that government cover-ups surrounding unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs)—a term now used instead of UFOs—have spanned 80 years. He claims that secret programs have been working to reverse-engineer alien technology retrieved from crashes, fueling an arms race with Russia and China. “The first country that cracks this technology will be the leader for years to come,” Jay Stratton, former director of the Pentagon’s UAP task force, states in the documentary. “This is similar to the Manhattan Project: We developed the atomic weapon, we won the war, and it made us a superpower for almost a century now. This is the atomic weapon on steroids.” Among those interviewed is Luis “Lue” Elizondo, a former Defense Department official who once worked with the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). Serving as the film’s narrator, he alleges that an ultra-classified initiative, known as the Legacy Program, has been collecting and concealing evidence of extraterrestrial activity for decades—even from U.S. presidents. “Even presidents, it seems, have been operating on a need-to-know basis,” Senator Marco Rubio says in the film. Elizondo suggests that UAPs are studying Earth's nuclear and military capabilities and warns that the lack of widespread awareness could lead to catastrophic consequences. He compares the situation to 9/11, when intelligence failures led to a devastating attack despite prior warnings. “We discovered that there actually was another deeply hidden and much larger UAP program,” he states in the documentary. “This program was so sensitive that it was withheld from the secretary of defense, Congress, and even the president of the United States.” The documentary also features James R. Clapper Jr., former director of national intelligence, and Tim Gallaudet, former chief oceanographer for the Navy. Farah reveals that while 34 officials were willing to appear on camera, at least 10 others—including politicians and intelligence officers—refused due to fears of professional ruin or even personal harm. “Fearful about retaliation from those who do not want this information revealed [or] fearful for their lives,” he tells *The Washington Post*. One of the most controversial claims in the film is that the U.S. has been capturing UFOs since 1947, and that these retrievals have included “the bodies of non-humans.” Elizondo goes even further, alleging that multiple species of extraterrestrials exist. The film also presents firsthand accounts from military personnel who claim to have witnessed crafts defying the laws of physics, including sightings of giant flying black cubes and red squares the size of football fields hovering near military bases. Some interviewees recount seeing UAPs deactivate and even activate nuclear weapons in both the U.S. and Russia. Physicist Hal Puthoff, who has conducted government-funded UFO research, praises Farah for giving credibility to these testimonies by bringing them forward simultaneously. “The brilliance of what Dan Farah did was to quietly go behind the scenes and talk to 34 people and say, ‘Okay, if you all come out at the same time, then you don’t have that stigma associated [with talking about UFOs],’” Puthoff says. However, skeptics argue that the documentary lacks scientific rigor. *The Hollywood Reporter’s* Daniel Fienberg criticizes it for presenting theories without counterarguments, writing, “My problem with *The Age of Disclosure* isn’t the lack of opposing voices. It’s that there couldn’t be experts debunking anything here. Nothing is proven, and thus nothing can be refuted.” Despite the controversy, bipartisan political figures, including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) and Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota), have expressed concerns about UAPs. The film calls for greater transparency and official reporting channels for pilots and military personnel who encounter unknown aerial phenomena. Brett Feddersen, former director of aviation security on the White House National Security Council, emphasizes the importance of breaking the stigma. “If you see something or you know someone who has, don’t be afraid,” he says in the film. “It’s hard to identify things, but let the professionals take it and make sure you pass it along.” Beyond national security concerns, some experts believe the technology behind UAPs could have significant humanitarian benefits. Many of the reported crafts appear to move at extraordinary speeds without visible propulsion or fuel emissions, hinting at a possible energy source that could revolutionize clean energy. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tennessee), who is pushing for UFO disclosure, argues that withholding this information is unacceptable. “I am one of those crazy Christians in the world. I mean, I’m a fundamentalist. I believe Jesus died on the cross for my sins, and I don’t hate anybody that doesn’t,” he says. “I think [alien life is] just another one of God’s creations.” His concern, he adds, is that agencies like NASA and the CIA are using taxpayer dollars to fund unnecessary research when the truth is already known. “As we say in East Tennessee, it’s as crooked as a dog’s tail.” Ultimately, *The Age of Disclosure* raises a question that may define the future: if aliens are real, how long can their existence remain a secret? Based on a report by WP 2025-03-13 The Age of Disclosure | Official Trailer (2025) -
0
The Guardian ‘smashed my life’ with sex misconduct claims: Noel Clarke Fights Back in Court
Noel Clarke, the actor at the center of a high-profile libel trial, has accused The Guardian of destroying his life with what he describes as false allegations of sexual misconduct. The 49-year-old is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM) over multiple articles and a podcast that alleged misconduct by Clarke, including a 2021 feature in which 20 women came forward with claims against him. Clarke has consistently denied all accusations, while GNM maintains that its reporting is both truthful and in the public interest. Taking the stand in London’s High Court, Clarke was visibly emotional as he addressed the allegations, stating, “They have smashed my life for four years with this rubbish, this nonsense. Four years.” He continued, “I did not do this, I would not do this. I have got children. This is not true.” He asserted that while he is “a flawed guy,” he is not the person he has been portrayed as. One of the allegations Clarke denied involved an incident with a woman known as “Penelope.” The court heard claims that Clarke had “giggled” after getting an erection during a sex scene, allegedly saying, “Look what you have done to me.” Clarke refuted this, stating, “Definitely not. We were under immense time pressure.” He emphasized that such scenes can be uncomfortable but insisted that no such incident occurred. “In terms of me having an erection, that did not happen. There were 20 people in the room. Where are the people who saw it?” he asked. He also detailed how the scene had been thoroughly planned, including a mutual agreement not to use modesty patches, stating, “Nobody had any problems with it.” Clarke further accused GNM of attacking his artistic work. “You are attacking my art, because of how I choose to direct my films, and it is egregious,” he told GNM’s lawyer, Gavin Millar KC. The court also heard allegations from another woman, “Sophia,” who claimed that Clarke had grabbed her hand and placed it on his crotch and also held her by the throat. Clarke dismissed these claims as “nonsense” and pointed out that he and “Sophia” had continued discussing potential projects together even after the alleged incident. “She has completely mixed herself up in her own lies,” he said. When questioned about why she would fabricate such claims, Clarke responded, “I think that Sophia is lying because she wanted attention.” He further stated, “I think she wanted to feel something and wanted to feel part of something to be believed.” Concluding his statement, he declared, “Unfortunately, this particular person is telling flat-out lies.” The trial, which will determine liability rather than the extent of any damages, is ongoing. Clarke has significantly increased his claim for special damages, now exceeding £70 million, and is also pursuing legal action over alleged conspiracies to fabricate claims against him. Philip Williams, representing Clarke, argued in written submissions that his client “has clearly established the falsity of all of the allegations” and had been given little opportunity to defend himself when the accusations were initially published. Williams claimed Clarke was now widely perceived as a criminal by colleagues who once trusted him. In defense of its reporting, GNM’s legal team, led by Millar, insisted that the publication had not blindly accepted the allegations. “Much time and resource was devoted to getting to the truth,” Millar stated, adding that there was “ample evidence” that the articles were either wholly true or substantially accurate. The trial is set to conclude in April, with a written judgment to be issued at a later date. Until then, Clarke remains steadfast in his fight to clear his name, as the legal battle continues to unfold. Based on a report by The Telegraph 2025-03-13 -
0
Trans punk rocker slammed for evil lyrics during onstage performance at Bernie Sanders rally
Laura Jane Grace, the transgender rocker and frontwoman of the punk band Against Me!, has ignited a storm of controversy after opening a Bernie Sanders rally with a provocative song questioning God’s anatomy. The performance, which took place in Kenosha, Wisconsin, featured Grace performing a new solo track, *Your God (God’s D–k)*, with lyrics that many have slammed as vulgar, anti-Christian, and offensive. During the song, Grace sang, *“Does your god have a big fat d–k? Cause it feels like he’s f–king me.”* The lyrics continued with even more explicit lines, including, *“When he whips out his meat does your world fall to its knees?”* and *“Does he chew c– like bubblegum and give b–wjobs like a vacuum?”* The song quickly drew backlash, with critics calling it a deliberate attack on religious beliefs. Conservative social media erupted in outrage. Libs of TikTok called the performance *“absolutely sickening.”* Political commentator Robby Starbuck condemned the act, writing on X, *“This is who the Democrats are now. Pure evil.”* Others criticized the explicit nature of the lyrics, with one user commenting, *“God will not be mocked.”* Even some Democrats expressed discomfort with the choice of performer. A self-identified moderate Democrat wrote, *“It’s hard to express how ashamed and disappointed I am in these people now. What has happened these last few years may not ever be undone. Inexcusable.”* Another critic remarked, *“Little Bernie has gone full Satan, right before our eyes! What kind of singer even writes this on paper, let alone sings it in front of an audience?”* Grace, 44, has been a longtime supporter of Bernie Sanders, previously performing in support of him during the 2020 campaign. Known for her raw and rebellious style, she has never shied away from controversy. In a past performance, she sang about burning crucifixes, white supremacy, and automatic weapons, with lyrics like, *“God is good and God is great, now get the f–k out of the USA.”* The Sanders rally, part of a national tour titled *"Fighting Oligarchy: Where We Go From Here,"* drew approximately 3,500 attendees to a small college sports arena. Wisconsin, the event’s location, has been a battleground state in recent elections, flipping to the Republicans in the last presidential race. Despite the backlash, neither Sanders nor his campaign has publicly commented on Grace’s performance or the controversy it has stirred. However, the incident has once again highlighted the growing cultural and political divide, with critics pointing to the performance as evidence of what they see as an increasingly extreme and out-of-touch progressive movement. Based on a report by NYP 2025-03-13 -
0
Government’s attempt to prevent ‘two-tier’ sentencing fails
The Sentencing Council has firmly rejected the justice secretary’s demand to reverse new sentencing guidelines that require judges to consider an offender’s ethnic, cultural, or religious background when determining their sentence. These changes, set to take effect in April, have sparked controversy, with critics warning they could create a “two-tier” justice system by potentially leading to more lenient sentences for ethnic minority and transgender offenders. Lord Justice William Davis, the chairman of the Sentencing Council, has made it clear that the judiciary must remain independent and not be subjected to ministerial influence. In response to Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s letter urging the council to withdraw the guidance, Davis stated that sentencing should not be dictated by the government. The two are set to meet for discussions on the matter. The updated guidelines advise judges to take into account whether an offender belongs to an ethnic, cultural, or religious minority when deciding between a custodial or community sentence. This has drawn sharp criticism from those who argue it undermines the principle of equal treatment under the law. Mahmood, in her letter to Davis, threatened to introduce legislation to override the independent Sentencing Council’s decision if it refused to reconsider the guidance. She also indicated she would review whether the authority to issue sentencing guidelines should be transferred from the council to government ministers. However, Davis firmly rejected these threats, emphasizing the necessity of maintaining judicial independence in sentencing matters. “I respectfully question whether the inclusion of a list of cohorts in the imposition guideline was a policy decision of any significance. However, whatever the import of the decision, it related to an issue of sentencing,” he stated. He also warned, “In criminal proceedings where the offender is the subject of prosecution by the state, the state should not determine the sentence imposed on an individual offender.” Davis further noted that he was seeking legal advice on whether the justice secretary had the authority under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to request immediate revisions to the guidelines. “This is not a power which ever has been used to ask the council to revise a guideline immediately after it has been published and which has been the subject of detailed consultation with the Lord Chancellor,” he added. Mahmood has argued that no government minister approved the guidance or was involved in the consultation process. However, Davis countered by stating that the consultation received 150 responses, including from the then-minister for sentencing, and that no concerns were raised about the issue now being debated. He also pointed to evidence showing disparities in sentencing outcomes between white offenders and ethnic minorities, stating that the reasons behind these disparities remain unclear. “The council’s view is that providing a sentencer with as much information as possible about the offender is one means by which such disparity might be addressed,” Davis explained. “I have seen it suggested that the guideline instructs sentencers to impose a more lenient sentence on those from ethnic minorities than white offenders. Plainly that suggestion is completely wrong.” Meanwhile, Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, has intensified pressure on Mahmood to take decisive action. He called on her to use her powers to replace members of the Sentencing Council, arguing that their stance is unacceptable. “The justice secretary’s tough talk has failed. Unless she acts decisively now, in just 21 days’ time she will preside over a justice system that she concedes is two-tier. That would be completely unacceptable,” he said. Jenrick added, “The individuals on the Sentencing Council behind this two-tier guidance must be removed and replaced with people who believe in equality under the law. The justice secretary should waste no time exercising the powers of appointment over the council that she has.” As the debate continues, the clash between the government and the judiciary underscores a fundamental tension between political authority and the independence of the courts, with significant implications for the future of sentencing policies in the UK. Based on a report by The Times 2025-03-13
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
-
Recommended Posts