.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png.8488ab72b8bb2e508209bfe3211b6e08.png)
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Latest posts...
-
105
Over 15,000 Doctors Urge Senate to Block RFK Jr.’s Nomination as Health Secretary
You imagine that medicine as it is today is about curing people, LOL. It's a business and wants profits, lots and lots of profit. Sooooo, they need sick people, lots and lots of sick people. We live in a sick society, mentally and physically, but don't worry, be happy, we'll all be gone soon enough. -
0
Prince Harry Secures Landmark Victory in Privacy Case
Prince Harry has achieved what his legal team is calling a "monumental victory" in his privacy invasion case against News Group Newspapers (NGN), the publisher of *The Sun*. The case, set to launch into a weeks-long trial, was settled on the opening day in a development described as extraordinary. This outcome has garnered attention not only for its implications but also for the strong statements it has inspired. David Sherborne, Prince Harry's lawyer, echoed these sentiments, calling for broader investigations into NGN’s "illegal actions and its blatant disregard for the law." He urged the police and Parliament to probe not only the unlawful practices but also the "perjury and cover-ups" associated with the case. Exposing the Truth Sherborne revealed that NGN unlawfully employed over 100 private investigators on more than 35,000 occasions across 16 years. These actions were allegedly known to editors and executives, forming what Sherborne described as an "extensive conspiracy" to cover up the misconduct. He also noted that many individuals implicated in these activities remain in senior positions within News UK and other global media outlets. The lawyer praised the resilience of both Prince Harry and Lord Watson, stating that their persistence led to a "historic admission" from NGN, despite the company’s longstanding denials and resistance. A Milestone for Prince Harry Prince Harry’s settlement with NGN includes "substantial damages," accompanied by an apology acknowledging the distress caused by the invasive actions of journalists and investigators. While NGN has admitted to unlawful practices associated with its now-defunct *News of the World*, it continues to deny allegations of phone hacking at *The Sun*. This point remains unresolved in the settlement, despite being a key aspect of Prince Harry’s case. Royal commentator Jennie Bond reflected on the significance of the outcome, describing it as a "huge victory" for the Duke of Sussex. "He wanted his day in court, but he’s got the apology he sought without the prolonged ordeal of a ten-week trial," Bond noted, adding that the resolution allows Prince Harry to move forward with his life. Wider Implications This case was one of three legal battles Prince Harry has launched against British tabloids, accusing them of privacy violations. In a previous victory, the court ruled that phone hacking was "widespread and habitual" at the *Daily Mirror*. These cases highlight ongoing issues within certain corners of the press, raising questions about journalistic ethics and the protection of individuals' privacy. With this settlement, Prince Harry has not only secured a personal triumph but also shone a light on the systemic issues within the media. As his legal team and supporters have emphasized, this outcome serves as a reminder that no one is above the rule of law, regardless of power or influence. Based on a report by Sky News 2025-01-23 -
0
Trump Placed all Diversity equity, and inclusion staff on paid leave. Eventual Lay Off
In a controversial move, Donald Trump has instructed all federal diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) staff to be placed on paid leave, with plans for eventual layoffs. This decision is part of a broader agenda to dismantle diversity-focused initiatives across the federal government, a hallmark of his administration's policy shifts since returning to office. The directive stems from an executive order signed on the president's first day, which overturned protections established by President Lyndon Johnson. These protections had safeguarded workers from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and national origin. Trump's order also encourages private companies to “end illegal DEI discrimination and preferences,” signaling his intention to reshape both public and private sector approaches to diversity. The Office of Personnel Management has ordered all federal agencies to comply with these new directives. Agencies must place DEI staff on paid leave, remove any publicly available DEI-focused resources from their websites, and cancel all DEI-related training sessions by 5 p.m. Wednesday. These sweeping measures reflect Trump's commitment to what he has called a "new golden age" for the United States. Seeking to make an immediate impact, Trump has issued a flurry of executive orders targeting immigration, gender policies, and climate regulations. Many of these actions have systematically reversed policies implemented under the Biden administration. The president has also promised to remove over a thousand Biden-era appointees, including Admiral Linda Fagan, whom Joe Biden appointed as head of the U.S. Coast Guard in 2022. Trump dismissed Fagan on Tuesday, accusing her of an "excessive focus on diversity policies." In another significant step, the State Department has removed the “selecting your gender marker” page from its website. Previously, individuals applying for or updating passports could choose from male (M), female (F), or unspecified/another gender identity (X). Now, the page redirects to general passport information. This change follows Trump’s executive order requiring all government agencies to ensure that official documents, such as passports and visas, “accurately reflect the holder’s sex.” The administration has declared that the U.S. government will recognize only two sexes, male and female, as part of a broader campaign to eliminate what it describes as “radical and wasteful” DEI initiatives. Heralding these changes as part of his vision for a revitalized America, Trump has emphasized his intent to undo policies he perceives as divisive or inefficient. However, critics argue that these moves undermine decades of progress in promoting equality and inclusion. As debates rage over the implications of these measures, the president remains resolute, declaring these actions essential to restoring what he views as America’s foundational values. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2025-01-23 -
0
Why Some Brits Envy America’s Donald Trump
Donald Trump's re-election as the 47th (and also 45th) president of the United States sparked a wave of mixed emotions across the Atlantic. For some Britons, his return to the Oval Office seemed to highlight the inadequacies of their own government, particularly under the leadership of Keir Starmer's Labour Party. Trump's bold promises, such as putting a man on Mars, stood in stark contrast to what many in Britain perceive as their government’s inability to prioritize national interests. The inauguration, filled with its usual flair, had Britons looking on with a mix of awe and envy. Trump’s signing of executive orders, aimed at restructuring the nation, left some British onlookers wishing for a similar figure who would unapologetically place their country’s needs first. One could hear the collective cry, “Please can that man be Keir Starmer?” as they longed for a leader who exudes confidence and assertiveness. On social media, the sentiment of looking forward to Trump humiliating the Labour government resonated with many. Comments poured in, expressing eager anticipation. "Honestly, it’s the only bit of good news we have to look forward to at the moment," said one user, reflecting the widespread disillusionment. Another remarked, “Never in my life could I have dreamt of wishing a foreign state would heap humiliation on our own country’s leader. Yet this is what we have been reduced to.” Tina, one respondent, went as far as expressing hope that Trump might label the Labour Party as a terrorist organization, showcasing the depth of frustration among some segments of the British population. This, however, underscores a broader issue where foreign influence is seen as a necessary corrective to domestic policy failures. Critics of the Labour government accuse it of economic mismanagement, contributing to a hostile environment for the wealthy and leading to an exodus of millionaires, which in turn impacts the nation's tax revenues. The refusal to exploit natural resources, coupled with porous borders and a lenient justice system, are seen as further acts of treachery against the country’s well-being. The idea that envy of Trump’s America might be considered treasonous by some is met with skepticism. For those disenchanted with their current leadership, Trump's decisive actions—banning net zero initiatives, tightening border control, and committing to free speech—represent a model of governance they yearn for. Even the symbolic return of Winston Churchill’s bust to the Oval Office was seen as a nod to values that many feel have been neglected in Britain. Trump’s inaugural spectacle, from Melania’s striking outfit to Barron Trump’s towering presence, encapsulated the grandeur and assertiveness that some Britons feel is missing in their political landscape. Figures like JD Vance, who embodies the American Dream, further fueled the longing for leadership that champions the working class and eschews politically correct quotas in favor of natural diversity. In Trump’s first 24 hours, executive orders promising abundant energy, tighter borders, and a rollback on progressive policies presented a stark contrast to Britain’s path. For some, it seemed that Britain might benefit from a similar approach, even if that meant metaphorically joining the United States as its 51st state. As Britain watches from the sidelines, the yearning for a Trump-like figure to lead with boldness and a clear agenda grows among those dissatisfied with their current political climate. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2025-01-23 -
0
Footballers: Underestimated Intellectuals, Study Reveals
The stereotype of the “stupid footballer” is far from accurate, according to a recent study that sheds light on the cognitive capabilities of professional players. Scientists from the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and Oxford University have assessed the cognitive function of footballers and found them to be exceptionally clever. Predrag Petrovic, a researcher involved in the study, emphasized, “These are super-clever individuals in terms of how their brain works. Maybe some of them are not as schooled, but you absolutely cannot dismiss their brains.” This research counters the age-old cliché that the best use of a footballer’s head is simply to hit the ball. Petrovic and his team tested 200 professional players from Brazil and Sweden, evaluating various cognitive abilities such as working memory, executive function, and problem-solving. Remarkably, the footballers consistently outperformed the average person, indicating a high level of cognitive proficiency. Leonardo Bonetti, a co-author of the study from Oxford University, explained that football inherently involves complex problem-solving skills. “When you want to dribble, you need to see very quickly what the defensive player is doing and be faster. If you are a midfielder, you need to plan properly, see the right path, anticipate how defensive players move, then take a decision to calibrate a pass.” These cognitive demands are reflected in the players’ test performances, which placed them in the 90th percentile—equivalent to an IQ of 120 to 130. The study also highlighted the players’ exceptional cognitive flexibility, placing them among the top 1 to 2 percent worldwide in such tests. Petrovic noted, “It is striking how good they are. They belong to the 1 to 2 percent of the best in the world in these tests. These are super-clever individuals.” Despite these findings, the stereotype of the unintelligent footballer persists, partly due to some infamous moments off the pitch. Instances like Jack Grealish struggling to identify England on a map or Mohammed Anas awkwardly thanking both his wife and girlfriend in a post-match interview fuel this misconception. However, Petrovic argues that these anecdotes should not overshadow the players’ intellectual prowess on the field. He stated, “When you speak to these players, they explain how they are always thinking about the next move, about where the space is, several steps ahead. They need to do those types of calculations all the time.” The stereotype of the dim footballer is not confined to the UK. Bonetti mentioned that in Italy, football players are often viewed as lacking intelligence. Similarly, German manager Hans Meyer once remarked, “In every squad there are five really stupid players. One of them would absolutely live under a bridge if he didn’t play football.” Bonetti believes this misconception stems from the educational background of many players. “Even if they are clever, they are not educated. Most stop at high school, possibly before. This might be related to lower knowledge, not lower intelligence.” Gregor Robertson, a former professional footballer turned journalist for The Times, expressed hope that the study would change public perceptions. “Am I surprised by the findings of this study? Not in the slightest. It’s the capacity to acquire skills and detailed understanding—to learn—that makes elite footballers the very best players of the most popular sport on the planet. The stereotype of the dullard footballer is as old as the hills, but formal education is not the only barometer of intelligence.” David Beckham once famously remarked about his son, “I definitely want Brooklyn to be christened, but I don’t know into what religion yet,” a statement often cited as evidence of footballers' supposed lack of intellect. However, this study suggests it’s time to reconsider such stereotypes and recognize the impressive cognitive abilities these athletes possess. Based on a report by The Times 2025-01-23 -
0
Starmer Accused of Concealing Southport Terror Link with Legal Cover
Nick Timothy said Starmer had executed “a cynical masterclass in obfuscation” Sir Keir Starmer has faced sharp criticism over claims that his government used contempt of court laws to obscure details of Axel Rudakubana’s terror-related past. Nick Timothy, former joint chief of staff to Theresa May and now Conservative MP for West Suffolk, accused Starmer of orchestrating a deliberate cover-up in what he described as “a cynical masterclass in obfuscation.” Timothy compared Starmer's handling of the Rudakubana case to Theresa May's transparency during incidents like the Parsons Green Tube attack in 2017. May had publicly acknowledged terror links when they were identified, while Starmer allegedly chose to withhold such details in this case. Timothy pointed to a 2017 tweet from Starmer referencing the Finsbury Park attack, where he openly extended his condolences to the victims of terrorism. He questioned why, in the Southport case, the government refrained from disclosing Rudakubana’s possession of ricin and a terror manual until much later. “The prime minister would’ve been briefed immediately when the ricin and the terror manual were discovered,” Timothy asserted. “They made the decision not to share that information with the public, and even Angela Rayner called any link to terror ‘fake news.’ I assume they were worried about a public reaction. They would have assumed he was a Muslim, but you cannot cover up details because you need to be transparent.” Timothy further criticized the government’s approach, arguing that withholding the truth fueled conspiracy theories. “The prime minister doesn’t understand that truth is the antidote to conspiracy,” he said. “Those details were released in October anyway and didn’t jeopardize the trial, whatever the prime minister says today.” Serena Kennedy, chief constable of Merseyside Police, revealed that her force had wanted to share more information about the Southport case earlier but was advised against it by prosecutors. Similarly, Matt Jukes, the head of UK counterterrorism policing, expressed a similar stance, suggesting legal guidance prevented timely disclosures. Journalists also expressed frustration over the lack of transparency. The Daily Mail’s crime and security editor noted a “worrying pattern” of law enforcement agencies being instructed to remain silent in high-profile cases. After Rudakubana pleaded guilty, reporters pressed for the full background of the case to be revealed, citing public interest in understanding the terror connections. Critics argue that the government’s reluctance to disclose key details at the appropriate time undermines trust and raises questions about the use of legal mechanisms to manage public perception. The accusations against Starmer underscore a broader debate over the balance between legal constraints and transparency in cases involving national security, with many calling for greater openness to ensure public confidence in the justice system. Based on a report by The Times 2025-01-23
-
-
Popular in The Pub
Recommended Posts