hypochondriac

That may be true but Zelensky was tactically clueless. Starmer played it fantastically by comparison. Arguing with Trump in the White House is only going to end one way. It sucks for us because it means the UK taxpayer is going to be even more under the cosh to finance the war.

What angle was the salute? That will determine the severity of the situation.

Why wouldn't you want to swap lives with him?

Would you want to swap lives? Because I certainly wouldn't.

His life is fucking awful. Can never retire, in a fishbowl and no anonymity or ability to make choices for himself for the most part.

Oh dear BBC. Broadcasting Hamas propaganda dressed up as a documentary. The silly celebs who signed a petition to bring this back have egg on their faces once again: https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/statements/gaza-how-to-survive-a-war-zone

If it goes some way to stopping the war on reasonable terms and doesn't mean Ukraine have to capitulate entirely the whilst it's unedifying to treat your supposed friends like that, I'd probably take it over the war continuing. Lots of unknowns though and it depends what Russia would agree to.

Tbf to Starmer that press conference with Trump was probably his strongest moment in office so far.

GM tried to find out personal details of a poster on here in order to try to take legal action against him because he didn't like something he wrote. That makes him a grade A cunt in my book.

Think you'll unite the forum there.

I think you missed the sarcasm...

Christ. Who has the time to read all that?

Sounds like a terrible person but hardly the worst crimes in the world.

Yet you seem to be the one who knows all about him and what he's about. Curious.

Who is this Andrew Tate fella? You seem to be a bit of an authority on the subject. I'll add him to the list alongside Hopkins and Robinson.

He will never play for us again after this season. Pretty bizarre how he has acted and subsequently how we have treated him. He will be a bit of an odd footnote who would have been forgotten already if he didn't have the heart problem in the summer.

Maybe he values other policies to a greater degree? Come on this is basic stuff that you know. Plenty of people voted for Labour at the last election but didn't agree with all their policies.

Since when is that the case? I know for a fact that many Labour supporters have taken issues with a lot of their current political programme.

Someone is simple.

I was just thinking this thread had been missing a link to a Guardian article recently.

You can't seriously believe that supporting a campaign prior to being in power and then not supporting it once you've won an election is not going to be viewed as duplicitous. Essentially that would mean you have carte blanche to agree with everything and anything and then do the opposite once in power. He'd have been better off being far more non committal prior to getting in power if he didn't want to be seen as untrustworthy.

I'd say it was a bit more than an implication when you stand behind a sign saying what you will do and then do the opposite.

I agree with that but to be fair every party bullshit to get into power. I think where it's different for this lot is that they were so veciferous in their attacks and with a holier than thou attitude about things like the waspi women only to disavow it all once they got in.

Agree about pensioners but I still think the farmers thing is silly. It would be really easy in that case to have just said that the new rules about inheritance tax apply only if the farm is sold or is no longer in use for food production.