In the news

Posted on
Page
of 3,693
First Prev
/ 3,693
Last Next
  • Hahahahahahahahaha

    Fucking idiots in their cars

    And also - the Daily Mail should die.

  • The White Hart Inn, Greys has closed after suppliers boycotted them for being racist fucks. Some good news at last 🤌

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-65471314

  • Jenny Mills said: '[The] roads were inadequate before all the cycling zealots got on the council. When will they realise you cannot make people cycle? Dorset is a route to the West Country and the road system is frankly c***.'

    is this a censored crap? wow

  • yea, fuck 'em. I imagine all of the racist cunts who drink in there must be frothing at the mouth.

  • “Carlsberg [and] Heineken told us to stop selling their product because they don’t want their name associated with the pub because of the stigma. And Innserve who serve our pumps and line cleans, they’re not going to come on site any more.”

    Ryley blamed Essex police for acting on a complaint about the dolls when it had chosen not to take action after a similar complaint in 2018. She said: “I’m angry … because if the police left it alone like they left it alone in 2018, we wouldn’t be in this situation now. And we probably would have plodded on with the pub.”

    Don't understand why people say it's not nice to gloat - I'm gloating right now and it feels bloody lovely.

  • the racist cunts who drink in there must be frothing at the mouth

    As Mrs Riley says herself, "If they don't like it, they don't have to come through the door"

    he he he

  • That's almost enough to make me believe in the God that doesn't exist. One nest of repulsive scum gone, unfortunately many less blatant ones to go.

  • The absolute state of the Richard Branson interview on the front page of the BBC news website. Please feel sorry for the poor tax dodging billionaire.

    Fucking odious cunt.

  • Reminds me, there's a pub that we've been to a couple of times after 5-a-side that had a similar (but smaller) display behind the bar. We stopped going there and simply refer to it as "The Racist Pub".

    Next time I wander past I might check if they're still there and shop them to their suppliers too if they are.

  • Next time I wander past I might check if they're still there

    I'm sure if they have any sense, that little display will have been quietly removed in the past few weeks. If they have any sense...

  • Seditious conspiracy convictions for the Proud Boys

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65307770

    As someone with American roots that pre-date the War for Independence by more than a century: Rot in prison you traitorous fucks.

  • Two us marines and one army. Scary

  • Despite the U.S. constitution being intended to emphasise the separation of powers, the U.S. army has always been more political than the British one. Consider how many presidents were previously army officers, for one thing.

  • Isn’t a lot of that down to timing due to them all being old men and the US had the Vietnam draft (plus dodging thereof) as well as the world wars? Quite a few UK PMs have been in the military too (also National Service). I’d say the only reason we didn’t in the 80s was because we had the female PM who shall remain unnamed here for fucking ages… Surely we’d have had more ex-forces without her?

  • Isn’t a lot of that down to timing due to them all being old men and the US had the Vietnam draft

    Um, Washington? Jackson? Taylor? Grant? Eisenhower? To name just a few. All of whom were born a bit earlier than the Vietnam war.

    Tell me you know nothing about U.S. History without saying you know nothing about U.S. History.

    Quite a few UK PMs have been in the military too

    Mostly because of WWII. The U.K. has nothing like the long-traditional U.S. fast route from being a senior military officer to becoming a politician. Wellington is an exception here, where in the U.S. he'd be typical. Lots of things wrong with the U.K. establishment but there's significantly more separation between the military and the political administration here than over there.

  • Their entire armed forces had to enact rapid retraining schemes (read: re-indoctrinate people) in the days leading up to, and weeks following, Jan. 06.

    They got lucky.

  • Washington started out in the British Army (!).

    But yes, going back to a revolutionary or civil war, the leaders will come out of the forces. It’s a natural progression.

    I thought you meant more recently.

  • I thought you meant more recently.

    Why?

    The tradition of U.S. generals becoming politicians is as old as the country. In contrast, those U.K. politicians who were previously officers were mostly more junior and even then it's a smaller percentage. The reasons why are complicated, but ... well, I suppose I should stop being surprised how few people think this through. Except that it's such a damned obvious thing.

  • More recently you have Biden, who never served, Trump, who dodged the draft, Obama, who never served, George W. Bush, who was in the National Guard and is the most recent President who was in the military, then Clinton, who avoided the draft.

  • Ours go to Eton rather than to war.

  • There's a long tradition of the ruling class avoiding active military service in this country. That's what the plebs are for.

  • This. Very much this. Most U.K. PMs have been establishment, so their siblings did the military thing. Or the "joining the church to hide being a nonce" thing.

  • joining the church to help being a nonce

    Ftfy

  • So then the link was only 18th-20th C. And has ceased now they are removed from a large proportion of the population being involved with the military. If we’re going back centuries for military heads of state, the British Isles has had plenty. I don’t see that now it’s any more probable for a US president to be ex-military than an UK PM. Their lot are as much career politicians as here.

    I’ve given up trying to type and post a better response because I’m on the train and it’s cutting out.

  • If we’re going back centuries for military heads of state

    Because Richard III would be so relevant to the contemporary (relatively) democratic history of the two nations. Sounds like you said something without thinking it through and decided not just to double down on it but to print it in 72pt type.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

In the news

Posted by Avatar for Platini @Platini

Actions