Straggler

1 minute ago, blandy said:

Might post a reply later.

Damn wish I had written my second post in here sooner. You are the proud owner of 1000 internet points. 

Spend them wisely 

I also have an envelope here with the most obvious comedic response to this thread. The person who's post matches what is in the envelope wins 1000 internet points

Today I am going to clean the bathroom. I'm not doing it because I'm on VT putting off the moment when I get started. This thread is for the jobs/tasks/moments/experiences that you are putting off rather than just getting on with it and grasping that nettle.

18 hours ago, omariqy said:

I think the word they are looking for is massacre 

 

Followed quickly by the words war and crime. 

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Make Rochdale great... Again?!

I just googled "what is wrong with Rochdale" and I kid you not one of the first headlines I saw was.....

Jury warned to beware of prejudice due to Rochdale’s reputation for grooming

It should be make Rochdale wait again 

11 hours ago, Davkaus said:

And of the few who know, many believe he'll jettison his new pledges without a moment's hesitation.

 

 

This is where I am at with him too. A lot of what he promised 4 years ago I would describe as challenging to achieve, but well worth pursuing. Near enough all of it has been discarded and I'm feeling a little burned how much has gone and why it has gone. 

I'm not buying the different time different audience argument either. He is in the position of responsibility now because of the commitments he made then. He needs to either deliver against them or make a convincing argument as to why they are impossible to maintain. IMO neither of those things have been done. Political expediency seems the main justification, and all that means to me is that principles are nice, but really, they are not to be found here.

I'm also not sure who Starmer is actually listening to. It is not the members of his own party as votes taken at the conference are treated very much more like polling data than instructions.

So I can see what is written down, but don't trust that it will be delivered. With very little transparency around how policy is formulated I can't trust the process. All I have left is hope, and the behaviour I am seeing does not inspire it.

The main driving goal I can see is the campaign for a bullet proof manifesto. It seems that to achieve that bullet proof status there has to be nothing in it that the Daily Mail can make a negative headline out of. And the Daily Mail wants Tories, so the manifesto keeps lurching towards what DM readers want. This is not a good thing.

If the polling is correct, Labour are about to get a massive mandate to deliver a compromised and massively underwhelming manifesto. IMO they could still be in this place without losing their souls to do so 

3 minutes ago, withes_shin said:

 

Perfect thank you!

Does anyone know how many passes we strung together for that 2nd goal? Even the extended highlights don't have the whole passage of play and i could swear it must be 30 passes or more....

16 hours ago, Davkaus said:

I'm actually shocked that there are still depths tories can sink to that get the whip removed short of being a sex pest.

IIRC being a sex pest gets you promoted in the Tory party. Chris Pincher is the most obvious example. You are going to need to think of deeper and more unpleasant depths for them to sink to...

5 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

 

Yep, came here to post the very same thing. I thought at first maybe he was going for a laugh, but no. He went straight to glory to god and was dead serious.

8 hours ago, blandy said:

Point of order, if I may. That would be the job of the Government, not the opposition.

Technically correct, but there is a reason Starmer is getting to meet all the world leaders at the moment. They know what way the wind is blowing. Also, this is how Labour are representing how believe the UK should behave should they be in power.

20 minutes ago, BOF said:

I find that technically legal is the best kind of legal

Toto seems pretty comfortable with that definition too. 

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Saw some reports suggesting that all of Mercedes' testing was long testing. I.e. they were putting no focus on one lap performance.

Basically we haven't seen their actual pace yet.

Which makes sense given how far down the rankings they are on that testing session!
Whether they'll be able to trouble Red Bull is a whole other question of course

Their front wing is causing a little controversy too. Apparently it is within the rules, but goes against the spirit of the regulations.

19 minutes ago, blandy said:

I’d go Taser, but you’re deffo on the right lines.

As for Labour and their “act”. I guess they’re sticking to a kind of collective Western liberal democracy official in-step sort of line - saying the same things the UN, Canada, Aus, NZ, etc say. They got there late (IMO) but whether it the current government or the next one, probably a labour one, the only small impact they can have is via collective pressure with like minded allies all saying the same thing.

It's still an utter wet blanket of a position. We don't have to have the collective western liberal democracy view as our own UK objective. It is perfectly ok to have our own position and a collective bargaining position that differs slightly from it. It's like having indecisive Dave from the fast show incharge.  They are supposed to be representing us in the international community, not the other way around.

It was shameful politics yesterday. Everyone involved came out of it worse off. They all played the game as people die. All they achieved was to erode the hope that things will ever get better. 

And Starmer. He is fricking lost. He is so far from the man he promised when he became leader of the Labour party. So obsessed with the optics of doing no wrong that he will actively prevent good from happening. There is a quote out there about what triumphs when good men do nothing...

Why does he have to be the option against the people who actively want to do harm? 

I don't understand. How does this help anyone?

1 hour ago, nick76 said:

 

Never mind a party at his home. They did the same for the NRA annual conference. 

I know the sport isn't about aesthetics, but I won't deny that it is part of the appeal to me. This year the cars are quite dull to look at, with the minimalist approach (to paint) they are all taking to save weight. I did hear on the sky coverage of testing that they may change the rules to force the teams to put proper liveries on, and I really hope they do.

10 minutes ago, nick76 said:

 

It'll be worth a fortune because it is a self selecting group of the gullible all primed and ready for a good grifting. The return on the advertising of penis enlargement pumps on there must be epic.

11 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

What the ****?  

If a parody account tweeted this it would be criticised for going too far.

Also proves nominative determinism wrong.

3 hours ago, LondonLax said:

He won’t even do that. He’ll essentially borrow the money with his assets as collateral to put up the appeal bond. 

 

Borrow from where? Part of the judgement against him prevents him from taking loans from any bank registered in New York (which is pretty much all of them). His crime was to lie about the value of his assets to fraudulently get loans, the idea of the judgement is to prevent him doing it again. 

3 hours ago, desensitized43 said:

Oh yes, I'd forgot about the RAAC. In their defense that's successive governments that have known about that who've crossed their fingers and hoped that the bomb didn't go off on their watch.

 

There's a pattern though...if it costs anything to do something about it, they aren't interested.

Not actually true that successive governments did nothing. There was a school building program already in place when the Tories came in. Gove cancelled it and replaced it with nothing. 100 percent on the Tories this one.

pmsl.

3 hours ago, regular_john said:

 

Please don't take this the wrong way as I am not wishing to sound rude, but this accusation of genocide being pedalled against Israel is absolute nonsense and is, in my opinion, a reflection of:

 

1. A lack of understanding of the nature of the current conflict

2. A lack of understanding of the history of the conflict

And

3. An expression of naivety regarding the extent to which pro-Hamas and Islamist propaganda has infiltrated the conversation around this conflict 

 

Israel are not committing genocide in Gaza. They are fighting a justified war against a terrorist organisation that was responsible for the most heinous slaughter of Jewish people since the days of WW2. Hamas needs to be completely and totally eradicated in it's entirety.

 

Unfortunately, Hamas are also cowards who have constructed all of their bases and tunnels around, within, or directly underneath civilian infrastructure including schools and hospitals. They are using the population of Gaza as human shields, which inevitably (and tragically) leads to huge loss of civilian life if Israel make any concerted military effort against them. If Israel fails to take appropriate military action, Hamas will simply continue the slaughter, as they have promised to do.

 

And then when said civilians die, which is solely the fault of Hamas, the world blames Israel for committing genocide. Ludicrous.

 

Is Israel were intent on genocide, they could have done so at any point in the last several decades, such is the imbalance in military power between Israel and Palestine. That the population of Gaza has doubled since 2000 indicates that this is either the most inept attempt at genocide ever, or that there is and never has been a genocide, and cries to the contrary are a consequence of yet more Islamist propaganda.

Your post is a very literal justification of genocide. Your lack of self awareness is quite startling in a post denying that it is happening.