Also In The News

[Trav Le Bleu]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-50070481

 

Quote

The US woman accused of involvement in the crash which killed Harry Dunn has said she was "disappointed" not to have met his family.

Mr Dunn's parents rejected a "bombshell" offer from Donald Trump to meet Anne Sacoolas at the White House on Tuesday.

Charlotte Charles and Tim Dunn felt "a little ambushed" when the president revealed she was in the next room.

Mr Trump described his meeting with the couple as "beautiful" but "very sad".

A statement issued by Mrs Sacoolas' lawyer Amy Jeffress said: "We are trying to handle the matter privately and look forward to hearing from the family or their representatives.

"Anne accepted the invitation to the White House with the hope that the family would meet and was disappointed."

Harry's parents said they wanted to meet Mrs Sacoolas, 42, in the UK.

She returned to the United States under diplomatic immunity days after the crash which killed Harry, 19.

 

Speaking to journalists about the meeting, President Trump said: "My meeting with the family, it was beautiful in a certain way."

 

Referring to Mrs Sacoolas he said: "[Mrs Sacoolas] was in the room right out there, we met right here.

"I offered to bring the person in question in, and they weren't ready for it.

"I spoke with [Prime Minister] Boris [Johnson], he asked me if I'd do that, and I did it.

"Unfortunately they wanted to meet with her and unfortunately when we had everybody together they decided not to meet.

"Perhaps they had lawyers involved by that time, I don't know exactly."

I'm surprised he didn't just have her leap out of a cake.

[Wymsey]

Beware of text message scams.

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/its-emma-ive-fall-text-3434880

Edited 16 October 2019 by Wymeswold fox

[WigstonWanderer]

4 hours ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Beware of text message scams.

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/its-emma-ive-fall-text-3434880

By law there should be easy ways to opt out of these sort of premium rate services across the board. I’m not sure this is the case either in the UK or Australia. Better still have them disabled by default. Telecoms companies are right up there with banks, in my hierarchy of rip off merchants. They’ve historically either screwed over their customers or facilitated others to do so, wherever possible, and authorities have seemingly allowed them to do so.

 

Other examples are the old ring tones scams back in the day, and the current practice of automatically adding an extra data download allowance at high cost once your contracted allowance runs out. I’d also like the ability to selectively choose which foreign countries are enabled to dial. My ageing father has been caught out accidentally replying to incoming spam calls from foreign sources.

Edited 16 October 2019 by WigstonWanderer

[leicsmac]

 

Just gonna leave this here.

[yorkie1999]

 

9 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

By law there should be easy ways to opt out of these sort of premium rate services across the board. I’m not sure this is the case either in the UK or Australia. Better still have them disabled by default. Telecoms companies are right up there with banks, in my hierarchy of rip off merchants. They’ve historically either screwed over their customers or facilitated others to do so, wherever possible, and authorities have seemingly allowed them to do so.

 

Other examples are the old ring tones scams back in the day, and the current practice of automatically adding an extra data download allowance at high cost once your contracted allowance runs out. I’d also like the ability to selectively choose which foreign countries are enabled to dial. My ageing father has been caught out accidentally replying to incoming spam calls from foreign sources.

 The amount of scammers using electronic communications is getting ridiculous nowadays. Just lately I've had people ringing me up, with a name like shaun or rob with an obvious indian accent asking me if i want to buy washing machine insurance! As soon as you challenge them to their real name or location you get accused of being racist, and you can't ignore the phone call because it'll say something like Manchester or Reading on the location.  One of the worst ones is where there isn't even a real person on the end of the line but rather a recording that listens for key words such as yes, then pings someone to pick up the phone. Surely the onus is on the telecoms provider to provide adequate security against scamming phone calls.

[foxy boxing]

man stabbed outside co- op in Blaby last night. was out riding my back and saw the aftermath.They also cordoned of Mccolls store in Western Drive.there were  lots of police cars and police around.

[Finnegan]

8 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Just gonna leave this here.

 

I saw it this morning and thought it was a spoof. Amazing. 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

18 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

 

 The amount of scammers using electronic communications is getting ridiculous nowadays. Just lately I've had people ringing me up, with a name like shaun or rob with an obvious indian accent asking me if i want to buy washing machine insurance! As soon as you challenge them to their real name or location you get accused of being racist, and you can't ignore the phone call because it'll say something like Manchester or Reading on the location.  One of the worst ones is where there isn't even a real person on the end of the line but rather a recording that listens for key words such as yes, then pings someone to pick up the phone. Surely the onus is on the telecoms provider to provide adequate security against scamming phone calls.

As soon as I suspect a scammer or telemarketer I just end the call without speaking. 

[Carl the Llama]

9 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Just gonna leave this here.

And still he will be defended by the same old ostriches.

[Bobby Hundreds]

10 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Just gonna leave this here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50080737 

 

[MC Prussian]

17 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Just gonna leave this here.

 

8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

And still he will be defended by the same old ostriches.

 

6 hours ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50080737 

 

Ceasefire:

https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/syria-turkey-10-17-2019/index.html

 

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, MC Prussian said:

 

 

Ceasefire:

https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/syria-turkey-10-17-2019/index.html

 

 

Quote

 

US official says this is the US "essentially validating what Turkey did"

From CNN's Ryan Browne

The deal made with Turkey is "essentially validating" the Turkish offensive, a senior US official told CNN.

"This is essentially the US validating what Turkey did and allowing them to annex a portion of Syria and displace the Kurdish population,” the official said. 

The official continued:

“This is what Turkey wanted and what POTUS green lighted. I do think one reason Turkey agreed to it is because of the Kurds have put up more of a resistance and they could not advance south any further as a result. If we don’t impose sanctions then Turkey wins big time."

 

 

So basically nothing to do with that letter (which Erdogan reportedly threw in the bin before launching the offensive later that day) or even really the USA's diplomatic efforts.  They're graciously pausing (in their words) the offensive now that they've got what they want and before they get any real push back.  What are you trying to say?

 

[MC Prussian]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

 

So basically nothing to do with that letter (which Erdogan reportedly threw in the bin before launching the offensive later that day) or even really the USA's diplomatic efforts.  They're graciously pausing (in their words) the offensive now that they've got what they want and before they get any real push back.  What are you trying to say?

 

You base your opinion on CNN who quote an anonymous "official". Only one unnamed "official"? Is that a credible source by today's standard?

The "official" is certainly entitled to his opinion, but that is not news. It's opinion.

And with all due respect to CNN, that's the same news network that had a guest on a TV panel recently, labelling Tulsi Gabbard, probably the most upright of all Democratic candidates, a "Russian puppet".

CNN should re-name themselves as Central Opinion Network.

 

At least we have a ceasefire now.

 

And again, why focus on the US as the only force to allegedly being able to stop Turkey? Where are/were the other allies? And how was the US supposed to stop Turkey with a maximum of a meagre 200 troops in the first place?

It's not as if the US before Trump were occupying Northeastern parts of Syria illegally, the one strip of very fertile land where the majority of the country's oil production is taking place... 

 

What's wrong with the US getting out of Syria after seven lost years?

Edited 17 October 2019 by MC Prussian

[Finnaldo]

11 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

You base your opinion on CNN who quote an anonymous "official". Only one unnamed "official"? Is that a credible source by today's standard?

The "official" is certainly entitled to his opinion, but that is not news. It's opinion.

And with all due respect to CNN, that's the same news network that had a guest on a TV panel recently, labelling Tulsi Gabbard, probably the most upright of all Democratic candidates, a "Russian puppet".

CNN should re-name themselves as Central Opinion Network.

 

At least we have a ceasefire now.

 

And again, why focus on the US as the only force to allegedly being able to stop Turkey? Where are/were the other allies? And how was the US supposed to stop Turkey with a maximum of a meagre 200 troops in the first place?

It's not as if the US before Trump were occupying Northeastern parts of Syria illegally, the one strip of very fertile land where the majority of the country's oil production is taking place... 

 

What's wrong with the US getting out of Syria after seven lost years?

Abandoning the one reliable ally in the Middle East is an absolutely awful policy decision. The Kurds deserve much better than this and Trump pussies out. Do you seriously think Erdogan would’ve attacked US troops? He knew Trump is weak and would back down. Because he doesn’t have a spine. 
 

I don’t care much for Trump other than acknowledging he’s somewhat of a numpty but this is a low for me. This is a very desperate attempt to defend his worst foreign policy call yet.

[MC Prussian]

6 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

Abandoning the one reliable ally in the Middle East is an absolutely awful policy decision. The Kurds deserve much better than this and Trump pussies out. Do you seriously think Erdogan would’ve attacked US troops? He knew Trump is weak and would back down. Because he doesn’t have a spine. 
 

I don’t care much for Trump other than acknowledging he’s somewhat of a numpty but this is a low for me. This is a very desperate attempt to defend his worst foreign policy call yet.

You could equally make a case for having US troops and bases over there in the first place as part of their geopolitical strategy being the bigger mistake.

 

The Syrian government and their Kurdish affiliates are now the ones faced with the decision to stop Turkey. It is their fight, they are by no means ill-equipped - and they're making progress:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-50039106

Edited 17 October 2019 by MC Prussian

[Finnaldo]

7 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

You could equally make a case for having US troops and bases over there in the first place as part of their geopolitical strategy being the bigger mistake.

 

The Syrian government and their Kurdish affiliates are now the ones faced with the decision to stop Turkey. It is their fight and they are by no means ill-equipped.

The US has lost 8 servicemen (5 to non-hostile circumstances) and the UK 1 since Syrian intervention started in 2014. Is that 9 too many? I’d say yes. And I’m against any full intervention. But regardless of the merits previous policy decision, the US are in Syria and supporting what is by international standards an extremely reliable and very fair regime. 
 

The truth is, there’s a good chance telling Turkey to go fvck themselves would’ve meant no Kurds would’ve been buried today. The only outcome this has created is to turn an ally potentially over to Russia/Iran and made the US look weak. There’s really no upsides.

 

Edited 17 October 2019 by Finnaldo

[MC Prussian]

25 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

The US has lost 8 servicemen (5 to non-hostile circumstances) and the UK 1 since Syrian intervention started in 2014. Is that 9 too many? I’d say yes. And I’m against any full intervention. But regardless of the merits previous policy decision, the US are in Syria and supporting what is by international standards an extremely reliable and very fair regime. 
 

The truth is, there’s a good chance telling Turkey to go fvck themselves would’ve meant no Kurds would’ve been buried today. The only outcome this has created is to turn an ally potentially over to Russia/Iran and made the US look weak. There’s really no upsides.

 

That may or may not be. As of right now, it's all hypothetical.

One should have faith in the local forces being able to clear out the deadwood themselves.

 

Personally, I'm highly skeptical of US intervention abroad ever since the Iraq War sham ("definite proof of WOMD") or since I know how the US helped Bin Laden stock up on weapons in the late 70ies/early 80ies.

[Carl the Llama]

9 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

That may or may not be. As of right now, it's all hypothetical.

One should have faith in the local forces being able to clear out the deadwood themselves.

 

Personally, I'm highly skeptical of US intervention abroad ever since the Iraq War sham ("definite proof of WOMD") or since I know how the US helped Bin Laden stock up on weapons in the late 70ies/early 80ies.

All the more reason for them to be seen to do right by their allies in the fight against a problem of their own making.  

[Guest MattP]

As an aside, it is hilarious how whenever the opponents of Trump or Boris go after them within hours they seem to come up smelling of roses no matter how ridiculous the attempt was in trying to get there.

 

The left in 2019 are reminding me of that Simpsons scene where Homer pours milk on his cornflakes and it starts a fire.

[Finnaldo]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

As an aside, it is hilarious how whenever the opponents of Trump or Boris go after them within hours they seem to come up smelling of roses no matter how ridiculous the attempt was in trying to get there.

 

The left in 2019 are reminding me of that Simpsons scene where Homer pours milk on his cornflakes and it starts a fire.

Boris: was forced into a corner and agreed to a deal in which he suggested a year ago ‘should never even be considered by a Conservative government’ which he now calls and is unknown whether it will pass or not.

 

Trump: totally abandoned his Kurdish allies, only to mesh a ceasefire which forces them to cede valuable land when he could have simply told Turkey to fvck off. 
 

The alternative take to this is that it’s amazing that whatever Boris or Trump serve up in 2019, there’s always those gullible few happy to eat it up without question. You can’t accuse ‘the Left™‘ of being unreasonable when you’re basically whitewashing one of the worst foreign policy calls in years and a Brexit deal which (as well as being hypocritical) hasn’t passed and we don’t yet know the repercussions of as ‘Boris & Trump own the Libs’

[Guest MattP]

5 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

Boris: was forced into a corner and agreed to a deal in which he suggested a year ago ‘should never even be considered by a Conservative government’ which he now calls and is unknown whether it will pass or not.

 

Trump: totally abandoned his Kurdish allies, only to mesh a ceasefire which forces them to cede valuable land when he could have simply told Turkey to fvck off. 

Boris wanted a deal all along - he just wanted to take it down to the last minute, hence why all the "he's doing it for his hedge fund mates" tossers have now all vanished from the Internet. It's also a very different from the May deal. We can arrange independent trade, the backstop has gone, we are out of the customs union and NI can join up with Stormont consent.

 

Trump's decision and letter was ridiculous, I'm just laughing that as soon as everyone rips the piss a ceasefire is called.

Edited 18 October 2019 by MattP

[Finnaldo]

Just now, MattP said:

Boris wanted a deal all along - he just wanted to take it down to the last minute, hence why all the "he's doing it for his hedge fund mates" tossers have now all vanished from the Internet. It's also a very d

 

Trump's decision and letter was ridiculous, I'm just laughing that as soon as everyone rips the piss a ceasefire is called.

 

We have absolutely no idea if Boris wanted a deal or not, the events preceding the deal was defeat after defeat in both Parliament and the courts for Boris and there's a good chance that he decided a last minute deal was now a better option than whatever strategy was failing before it. But more importantly we have no way of knowing which is the truth at current, so talking in absolutes in nonsense. Regardless, It stands his position under a year ago was 'Customs in the Irish Sea is unthinkable' to 'its part of a Great New Deal' should have anyone questioning Boris' integrity or how 'planned' this actually was.

 

I mean, Kurds have died as a result of this disaster of a foreign policy call. Ceasefire or not, it's lost a key ally in the Middle East and one I'd happily support over a lot more nefarious regimes we prop up...

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Finnaldo said:

Boris: was forced into a corner and agreed to a deal.

 

2 hours ago, Finnaldo said:

We have absolutely no idea if Boris wanted a deal or not.

 

But more importantly we have no way of knowing which is the truth at current, so talking in absolutes in nonsense.

Within a few minutes of each other.

[RoboFox]

On 17/10/2019 at 02:08, leicsmac said:

 

Just gonna leave this here.

This is the first I've seen of this.

 

I can't quite believe it. 

 

The writers at the Onion must be scratching their heads, wondering how the actual, real life President of the United States of America is coming up with funnier, more biting satirical content than they do.

 

****ing incredible.

[Carl the Llama]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Trump's decision and letter was ridiculous, I'm just laughing that as soon as everyone rips the piss a ceasefire is called.

So you agree that he fvcked up?  That it was correct to call him out?  Then I really can't understand how you're concluding that an unnecessary loss of Kurdish and Turkish lives with Turkey annexing a part of Syria before calling it quits on their own terms constitutes 'the libs' being destroyed for raising very legitimate complaints.

 

It's not just 'the left' who have a problem with introspection.

Edited 18 October 2019 by Carl the Llama