General News Thread

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

Trump ripping into Khan is actually quite funny. 

I don’t think Khan is good by any stretch of the imagination but of all the glorious politicians we’ve had in leadership positions over the past couple of decades, Khan is one of the least worst. Everyone knows why Trump dislikes Khan. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

7 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I don’t think Khan is good by any stretch of the imagination but of all the glorious politicians we’ve had in leadership positions over the past couple of decades, Khan is one of the least worst. Everyone knows why Trump dislikes Khan. 

If it's brown, flush it down.

[Trav Le Bleu]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2k29233jeo

 

Like Germany, you would think that Japan would know all too well where that particular road ends. 

"Young Japanese people in particular are fed up. "[We are] sick of the current political situation," a young voter called Eriko Harada told a news outlet at a Sanseito rally."

 

Eriko Harada sounds like a Japanese-Viking fusion

 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

"Young Japanese people in particular are fed up. "[We are] sick of the current political situation," a young voter called Eriko Harada told a news outlet at a Sanseito rally."

 

Eriko Harada sounds like a Japanese-Viking fusion

 

I can see that. 

 

In all seriousness though, the Japanese have already experienced one kurai tanima, they should know better to avoid another. 

Edited 28 July 2025 by leicsmac

[st albans fox]

4 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

If it's brown, flush it down.

Is that a regular MAGA phrase ?

[Trav Le Bleu]

34 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Is that a regular MAGA phrase ?

Surprisingly, no.

[Sly]

Does the USA need to start banning guns, one state at a time? 
 

Totally ridiculous the amount of people that are killed whilst going about their lives. 

[leicsmac]

38 minutes ago, Sly said:

Does the USA need to start banning guns, one state at a time? 
 

Totally ridiculous the amount of people that are killed whilst going about their lives. 

One state at a time would need massive state line enforcement to stop the black market between states and guns crossing state lines. 

 

Federally and all at once would be better in that regard, but would still be wildly impractical given just how many firearms there are and how many people appear willing to die (and kill) to keep them. There would be a lot of blood on the floor before it was all over. 

 

More blood than the overall total of what is happening now over a period of time? Difficult to say. 

 

It's a hugely messy problem which is probably why both the executive and legislative in the US have backed away from any real action on the matter for a long time now. 

[Zear0]

Thoughts and prayers

[Sol thewall Bamba]

The Chancellor was at my office yesterday. I passed on your regards @Tommy G

[urban.spaceman]

3 hours ago, Sly said:

Does the USA need to start banning guns, one state at a time? 
 

Totally ridiculous the amount of people that are killed whilst going about their lives. 

Ironically Trump is probably the only person who can gaslight his own side into giving up their guns. 

[davieG]

Not exactly grabbing the headlines like the New York shootings

 

 

Two men have been killed and two others are in hospital after a stabbing at a business in Bermondsey, south London.

Metropolitan Police officers were called to a commercial address on Long Lane at about 13:00 BST on Monday. A man aged 58 died at the scene, while another man, 27, died later in hospital.

A third man, who's in his 30s, was detained in connection with the incident and is in hospital in a life-threatening condition.

A fourth man in his 30s is also in hospital but his injuries are not believed to be life-threatening. The incident is not thought to be terror-related, the Met said.

[Tommy G]

1 hour ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

The Chancellor was at my office yesterday. I passed on your regards @Tommy G

Hope she wasn't in tears?

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgery3eeqzxo

 

Nigel Farage has urged Technology Secretary Peter Kyle to "do the right thing and apologise" after he suggested that by opposing the government's online safety law, the Reform UK leader was on the side of sex offenders like Jimmy Savile.

Reform has said it would scrap the new law, arguing it does not protect children and suppresses free speech.

Kyle told Sky News: "Make no mistake if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today he would be perpetrating his crimes online - and Nigel Farage is on their side."

Farage called the minister's comments "disgusting," while his Reform colleague Zia Yusuf said the claim was "one of the most appalling things I've seen in my political life". 

 

Spicy. 

[Sampson]

Tbf I hate Farage and he’s proving once again that he is the biggest snowflake and cancel culture-er in parliament and the most likely to scream “that’s offensive”. I also think the irony is that he is the one most trying to promote a highly beurocratic (now there’s one word I can never spell) “papers please” big brother style government, but I think I’m with him on this one on this law being a mess waiting to happen and far too easy to bypass anyway.

Edited 29 July 2025 by Sampson

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Tbf I hate Farage and he’s proving once again that he is the biggest snowflake and cancel culture-er in parliament and the most likely to scream “that’s offensive”. I also think the irony is that he is the one most trying to promote a highly beurocratic (now there’s one word I can never spell) “papers please” big brother style government, but I think I’m with him on this one on this law being a mess waiting to happen and far too easy to bypass anyway.

Agreed, pretty much the same as any other Internet regs that aren't China level draconian in their implementation. 

 

That being said, the outrage comes tinged with hypocrisy once again, but I'll not elaborate on that here for risk of derailing the current topic. 

[Jattdogg]

4 hours ago, Zear0 said:

Thoughts and prayers

..."now is not the time"...

 

 

 

[bovril]

Yeah Farage is right on this occasion. Another example of how puerile and unintelligent most political discourse is in this country.

[kenny]

1 minute ago, bovril said:

Yeah Farage is right on this occasion. Another example of how puerile and unintelligent most political discourse is in this country.

Just ban smart phones for under 16's. Job done.

[urban.spaceman]

17 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgery3eeqzxo

 

Nigel Farage has urged Technology Secretary Peter Kyle to "do the right thing and apologise" after he suggested that by opposing the government's online safety law, the Reform UK leader was on the side of sex offenders like Jimmy Savile.

Reform has said it would scrap the new law, arguing it does not protect children and suppresses free speech.

Kyle told Sky News: "Make no mistake if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today he would be perpetrating his crimes online - and Nigel Farage is on their side."

Farage called the minister's comments "disgusting," while his Reform colleague Zia Yusuf said the claim was "one of the most appalling things I've seen in my political life". 

 

Spicy. 

Spicy indeed, but the idea that it's 'one of the most appalling things I've seen in my political life' is hilarious 

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Agreed, pretty much the same as any other Internet regs that aren't China level draconian in their implementation. 

 

That being said, the outrage comes tinged with hypocrisy once again, but I'll not elaborate on that here for risk of derailing the current topic. 

That's never stopped you before 

[leicsmac]

10 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

That's never stopped you before 

Fair to say 

[Finnegan]

I don't really understand how the age verification stuff is supposed to protect children from predators anyway tbh. 

 

Who is getting groomed on pornhub? Content was always (supposed to be) age verified, so it's just about who views this shit. 

 

Sorry if I'm being a bit naive, I'm not exactly an expert on online grooming, but surely social media and other platforms where you actually communicate with each other are where you're mostly likely going to find predators trying to talk to kids? And you don't need to be age verified to be on TikTok, X, Bkuesky or Reddit do you? You just need age verification to, once again, look at NSFW stuff? 

 

It's not really anything to do with predators, it's just all the age old puritanical hand wringing about hiding sex from kids. 

 

But I mean, we're several generations in to teenagers growing up looking at Internet porn and most of us are still pretty well adjusted (for the most part...!)

 

Did us far less harm than the bigoted brainwashing that's flying unmoderated around TikTok that's still apparently fine to watch? 

 

Personally I'm absolutely livid that I now have to subscribe to a vpn and pretend to be Swiss just to watch @Dr The Singh on his OnlyFans. 

 

Edited 29 July 2025 by Finnegan

[bovril]

2 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

It's not really anything to do with predators, it's just all the age old puritanical hand wringing about hiding sex from kids. 

 

But I mean, we're several generations in to teenagers growing up looking at Internet porn and most of us are still pretty well adjusted (for the most part...!)

 

Celeb nipslips were about as exciting as it got in my day. **** knows what kind of damage modern day porn is doing to young people considering how extreme some of it is. Probably my most authoritarian political position is that porn should just be outright banned. Stuff that is far less damaging to people is already. 

[Finnegan]

4 minutes ago, bovril said:

Celeb nipslips were about as exciting as it got in my day. **** knows what kind of damage modern day porn is doing to young people considering how extreme some of it is. Probably my most authoritarian political position is that porn should just be outright banned. Stuff that is far less damaging to people is already. 

 

I like you and I respect a lot of your opinions even though I've noticed, increasingly, over the last few years that I obviously don't agree with a fair few of them. I can see a certain amount of sanity and sense in some of your socially conservative opinions even if I don't relate. 

 

But, if you aren't being deliberately very hyperbolic, this is just silly in the absolute extreme. 

 

The porn industry does need to put under a considerable microscope, I do think that far more needs to be done to make sure the exploitation and abuse of performers is eradicated and their rights and safety are protected as much as possible. If these laws were a huge overhaul of the age verification and freedom of performers I'd be in full support. 

 

But the idea that all pornography should be banned outright and that it's some serious social danger is just hysterical, Mary Whitehouse nonsense.