General News Thread

[Dr The Singh]

8 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

what would be the point? depending on the crime they'd either ignore it or turn up 5 hours later to look at me for 5 seconds, tut and give me a reference number for something they'll never investigate 

 

I think that's hypocritical given Starmers government is far right tbqh

I expect Tommy Robinson will be the party leader very soon

[Foxdiamond]

1 minute ago, Dr The Singh said:

Tried that many times, the only time I got some response was when I got lawyers involved and threatened to sue them and my local MP, for ignoring the crimes against me.

That is worrying 

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

I thought we were an autonomous collective

 

Cleese: Brothers...

 

(voice off) and sister....

 

Cleese: and sister.

Edited 12 August 2025 by Parafox

[The Doctor]

5 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Being cynical is one thing but must be utterly miserable being so sour

it's not cynicism, it's informed experience of having previously engaged with the police. 

[Dr The Singh]

1 minute ago, Foxdiamond said:

That is worrying 

Im Very lucky, I have many lawyers and some connected people in my family.  Without that, I would be in a pickle.

 

Growing up in the 80's, never trusted the police.  But in this case I don't think my skin colour had anything to do with it.  It was blatant disregard, I hate to think how they treat the average joe.

[The Doctor]

genuinely incredible just how badly they've ****ed it. Like, we're approaching Liz Truss levels of approval 

 

[Dr The Singh]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

genuinely incredible just how badly they've ****ed it. Like, we're approaching Liz Truss levels of approval 

 

Liz > Starmer.

 

Liz has tits, Starmer is walking fanny

Edited 12 August 2025 by Dr The Singh

[leicsmac]

26 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Don’t think they are ignoring the problem? You are speaking on behalf of all farmers in the UK here. Be interesting to see what you are doing day in day out to combat climate change apart from make statements on a football forum crowing at everyone else. 

And nor did I say that they were collectively ignoring the problem, rather cautioning them to not do so by unwise short term decisions on policymakers 

 

To answer the second part, like anyone else outside that political system, what I am doing is all have the power to do - inform and (hopefully) enlighten as to what might be the best path forward, and vote when the time arises. 

 

(To be fair, I have been asked that question before and it's of course a reasonable one to ask, but I don't have any kind of delusions about having the power to change the world - being hopeful of being a small part of a necessary change will have to do. If people want to shoot the messenger then that's their right - go ahead and take aim, it changes nothing about the facts, their consequences and what needs to be done.)

Edited 12 August 2025 by leicsmac

[Foxdiamond]

9 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

it's not cynicism, it's informed experience of having previously engaged with the police. 

As you don't approve of them perhaps that suits you

[Muzzy_no7]

26 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

what would be the point? depending on the crime they'd either ignore it or turn up 5 hours later to look at me for 5 seconds, tut and give me a reference number for something they'll never investigate 

 

I think that's hypocritical given Starmers government is far right tbqh

Ignore it? No, this simply doesn’t happen.

 

5 hours later? Well if it isn’t an emergency response what’s wrong with this, especially given how stretched they are. 
 

Investigate? Reasonable enquiries should always be done especially when there’s a realistic chance of prosecution. 

[Dr The Singh]

1 minute ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Ignore it? No, this simply doesn’t happen.

 

5 hours later? Well if it isn’t an emergency response what’s wrong with this, especially given how stretched they are. 
 

Investigate? Reasonable enquiries should always be done especially when there’s a realistic chance of prosecution. 

I wish that was the case in my experiences.

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

genuinely incredible just how badly they've ****ed it. Like, we're approaching Liz Truss levels of approval 

 

Seems like that the adage that if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no-one holds true right now.

 

The era of "politics of compromise" appear to be over. Whether that's good or not...goodness knows.

[Dr The Singh]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Seems like that the adage that if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no-one holds true right now.

 

The era of "politics of compromise" appear to be over. Whether that's good or not...goodness knows.

I have to disagree, I've disagreed with majority of his policies, he has done little to please me.

[WigstonWanderer]

3 hours ago, FoxesDeb said:

I'm a woman, therefore it is one of my favourite words 

 

[leicsmac]

The above being said, given the way the landscape has shifted just in the past year and a bit, does anyone really want to put a prediction on where things will be in four years?

 

Everything involving events seems to be moving at speed right now, and opinion appears to shift just as quickly.

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

I have to disagree, I've disagreed with majority of his policies, he has done little to please me.

Yeah, hence the "try" part of the phrase. Clearly, he's tried and failed in this case.

 

Extremism and tribalism - of whatever stripe - is gaining ever more traction. 

[The Doctor]

27 minutes ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Ignore it? No, this simply doesn’t happen.

 

5 hours later? Well if it isn’t an emergency response what’s wrong with this, especially given how stretched they are. 
 

Investigate? Reasonable enquiries should always be done especially when there’s a realistic chance of prosecution. 

yes it does, and no, they don't tend to bother investigating.

[The Doctor]

20 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Seems like that the adage that if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no-one holds true right now.

 

The era of "politics of compromise" appear to be over. Whether that's good or not...goodness knows.

has he tried to please everyone? it's seemed more like he's taken the left and centre for granted and tried to appease the right, at which point the left and centre have en masse gone wtf? and moved support to the greens/lib dems/your party 

[Muzzy_no7]

9 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

yes it does, and no, they don't tend to bother investigating.

Is that you speaking generally based off a tiny proportion of data? 😂🤷‍♂️

 

I give up 

[Dr The Singh]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Yeah, hence the "try" part of the phrase. Clearly, he's tried and failed in this case.

 

Extremism and tribalism - of whatever stripe - is gaining ever more traction. 

People are poorer, services have got worse (non of this is Labours doing).  People are angry, lost trust in the system and unfortunately Starmer and Reeves lack the capability, self awareness to change that.  In fact Labour is a shambles.

[Dr The Singh]

4 minutes ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Is that you speaking generally based off a tiny proportion of data? 😂🤷‍♂️

 

I give up 

About bloody time

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

has he tried to please everyone? it's seemed more like he's taken the left and centre for granted and tried to appease the right, at which point the left and centre have en masse gone wtf? and moved support to the greens/lib dems/your party 

Yep, that's about the size of it, he's assumed the left were unwilling to risk something more extreme on the other side coming to power, but he has evidently miscalculated both them and the current situation.

 

10 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

People are poorer, services have got worse (non of this is Labours doing).  People are angry, lost trust in the system and unfortunately Starmer and Reeves lack the capability, self awareness to change that.  In fact Labour is a shambles.

It's no secret that social strife tends to follow people not having money in their pocket.

 

Thing is though, for some reason people then act all surprised and don't want to feel responsible when that anger puts someone or some people in power that then inflict a great deal of death and suffering.

 

In a democracy, if the monsters win, it's usually because enough people wanted them to be there.

[Dr The Singh]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Yep, that's about the size of it, he's assumed the left were unwilling to risk something more extreme on the other side coming to power, but he has evidently miscalculated both them and the current situation.

 

It's no secret that social strife tends to follow people not having money in their pocket.

 

Thing is though, for some reason people then act all surprised and don't want to feel responsible when that anger puts someone or some people in power that then inflict a great deal of death and suffering.

 

In a democracy, if the monsters win, it's usually because enough people wanted them to be there.

Interesting, who are we talking about here?

 

Your last statement is so true.

[leicsmac]

16 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

Interesting, who are we talking about here?

 

Your last statement is so true.

Mostly historical examples. Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet, Mugabe, the entire South African apartheid regime... all of them came about because people wanted "change", or "a firm hand", or both. They all gained, and/or kept, their power with the consent of at least a decent part of their populations. And when the horrible things started, those same people said "... well, nothing to do with us..."

 

I'm not going to list present day examples as that would be a lightning rod for trouble; but suffice it to say that I think there is really fertile ground for such monsters today. In a lot of places. 

 

And the worst thing about it all is that all of those people highlight and prey on the divisions between groups of humans, where the need for unity has never been more acute. 

Edited 12 August 2025 by leicsmac

[st albans fox]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

It will be fascinating to see how history scholars view the time period 2008-2030 in a few decades time in terms of world events and actions. 

 

If there are any history scholars left by that time and the information they have a a matter of record to go on is in any way truthful, that is. 

If  there are any historians left - i think groups/political leanings  will have their own versions of history and not accept anything else as being true. (Irrespective of the evidence)