egg

The reduction hasn't made any difference in Scotland, so I'm not sure what difference they think it'll make. Doesn't make sense that we have a different limit to Scotland though.

Hard to argue with any of this. Some will though. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTL9gZBkTg8/?igsh=bnJwdjRpY2g4YjMx

It didn't last. That Jacks shot says it all. Nice to see Bethell come good though, cracking player.

In an interview with MS NOW host Joe Scarborough Tuesday, Trump said the difference between the disaster in Iraq and the recent action in Venezuela was that former President George Bush "didn’t keep the oil". So if what comes out of the ground can be kept, illegal invasions are ok. Re Greenland. What's not being mentioned is that they can put as much military there as they need under the existing agreement, and mine what's in the ground, so things can stay as they are to secure any security or rare earth concerns. It's about imperialism and control. My shares in BlackRock World Mining Trust are doing well though.

Tidy

Barney

It's all bollox. The issue is about stopping the flow of oil and money to feck up China, Iran, India, and other states the US want to peg down. The cover story is a crap attempt to give legitimacy to regime change and put a patsy in charge.

Thanks, and that was my point. Who wants to go to an establishment with loads of yobs outside baying for brown blood. Ceno's have laid the blame at the door of the asylum seekers, not the people paying them a visit and causing issues.

The police wouldn't publicly lie and say there'd been no complaints of criminal damage if there had been, and that Ceno's had been asked to raise concerns if they hadn't. One side isn't telling the truth. I liked Ceno's back in the day. No way would I have gone there over recent times though. That's not because of the hotel residents, but because of the knuckle draggers hanging around.

On no assessment can there be jurisdiction to pick someone up in a foreign country and charge them with an offence that is not illegal in the country where they're arrested. Imagine British plod going to Amsterdam and nicking a local for possession of cannabis and dragging them over here to face the music. The concept is preposterous. As for the narco terrorism, I'm not sure it's even a thing, but the idea that a head of state is drug running to fund terrorism (what terrorism?) is far fetched. That's all despite a head of state not being able to stand trial in the US anyway.

Who do you believe, an unnamed spokesperson or Ceno's, or the spokesperson for Hampshire Police who said: "Our local neighbourhood policing team have regular contact with businesses in the area, and have made near weekly visits to Cenos in recent months to try and engage with them and understand if there are any issues they want to raise or discuss with us. "However, no concerns have been raised with our team on these visits. "We are also not aware of any incidents of criminal damage." Sounds like the finger of blame is being wrongly pointed. I'd hazard a guess that punters don't like all the agitated flag wavers outside though.

What would Gao do now that would improve things? The answer is what new owners do, not new owners for the sake of it.

Yep. SR have pumped a fortune into the club, and we'd be incredibly lucky to get another owner doing the same at this level. Where they've got it wrong is on the managerial appointment side, and recruitment at both ends of the pitch. I'm not sure what magic wand they think new owners would bring.

He was getting results then. He isn't now. There's a discussion up there ^^ about the possible reasons for the drop off.

Dividend

He sees you for what you are, so that's a plus.

Long winded, but interesting ChatGPT take on the impact of this on China. If nothing else, the summary in the final paragraph is worth noting. Makes me think that doing it hours before Maduro was to meet the Chinese was a warning to China to keep out of the Western Hemisphere. The idea of the U.S. “running” Venezuela—whether through regime change, trusteeship-like influence, or simply decisive geopolitical dominance—would be highly consequential for China, and almost entirely negative from Beijing’s perspective. The impact depends on how deep U.S. control goes, but even partial U.S. re-entry into Venezuela would weaken China’s position. Below is a structured breakdown. 1. Why Venezuela Matters So Much to China China’s stake in Venezuela is not ideological—it’s strategic and financial. China’s core interests in Venezuela ~$50–60B in historical loans, many oil-backed Long-term crude supply contracts A sanctioned partner outside U.S. financial control A symbolic foothold in the U.S. hemisphere Venezuela is one of the few cases where China accepted extreme political risk to secure influence close to the U.S. 2. What “U.S. Running Venezuela” Could Mean (Three Scenarios) Scenario A: U.S.-Aligned Democratic Government (Most Likely Hypothetical) Not formal control, but: Sanctions lifted conditionally IMF / World Bank reentry U.S. and EU energy firms return Impact on China China becomes a junior creditor, not a privileged one Oil exports likely reoriented toward U.S./EU markets Debt renegotiations under Western legal norms Chinese firms face transparency and competition rules ➡️ China loses leverage but not everything Scenario B: De Facto U.S. Economic Stewardship Something like: IMF-led stabilization U.S. influence over PdVSA restructuring Western control over oil sector recovery Impact on China Oil-backed loan repayment terms rewritten Potential write-downs or long delays Chinese state firms sidelined from key assets Loss of preferential access ➡️ Major financial loss and strategic retreat Scenario 😄 Hard U.S. Strategic Control (Least Likely) Think Cold War–style dominance: Security alignment Energy policy aligned with U.S. interests Explicit rollback of Chinese presence Impact on China Near-total loss of influence Stranded assets Diplomatic humiliation (symbolically huge) Precedent that China can be pushed out under pressure ➡️ Worst-case scenario for Beijing 3. Financial Impact on China Debt exposure Much of Venezuela’s debt to China is illiquid and opaque Repayment depends on political alignment A U.S.-aligned Venezuela would: Push for multilateral restructuring Reduce oil-for-debt arrangements Possibly treat China like any other creditor—or worse ➡️ China likely recovers less than expected, possibly far less. 4. Energy & Global Oil Markets If Venezuela is reintegrated into Western markets: Production could rise significantly over time Supply increases → lower global prices U.S. energy security improves For China Loses preferential access Faces more market-based pricing Reduced leverage over supply Ironically, China would still buy Venezuelan oil, but without political advantage. 5. Geopolitical & Psychological Impact on China This may be the most important part. Symbolic consequences Demonstrates limits of China’s Western Hemisphere reach Shows debt-based influence is reversible Reinforces U.S. primacy near its borders For Beijing, Venezuela is: A test case for how far Chinese influence can go A signal to other Global South partners If China loses Venezuela: Other debtor states may feel emboldened to rebalance China becomes more cautious in high-risk lending 6. China’s Likely Responses If the U.S. begins “running” Venezuela, China would likely: Write down losses quietly Avoid confrontation (Venezuela not worth a showdown) Double down elsewhere: Middle East Africa Southeast Asia Recalibrate lending toward: Equity Joint ventures Resource-linked projects with tighter control ➡️ Less ideological, more hard-nosed China. 7. Would the U.S. Actually Want to “Run” Venezuela? This matters because China knows the U.S. is ambivalent. Constraints on the U.S.: Political risk Reconstruction costs Migration pressures Domestic opposition to “nation-building” So Beijing may bet that: The U.S. stabilizes Venezuela just enough But does not fully displace Chinese interests Bottom Line If the U.S. were to effectively “run” Venezuela: China would lose one of its most leveraged positions in the Western Hemisphere Suffer financial losses and strategic embarrassment Be reminded that proximity still matters in geopolitics But: China would not retaliate aggressively Venezuela is important, not existential The lesson for Beijing would be caution, not escalation In short: Venezuela is one of the few places where U.S. reassertion would be a clear net loss for China—financially, strategically, and symbolically.

Yep. I said when elected that he'd target the BRICS nations and try to divide. Some will be partners, others isolated, and others targeted whether with sanctions/tariffs or otherwise.

This is from the wife of the deputy chief of staff.

Yep. Cuba next - must be all those cigars causing a security risk so needs addressing. Colombia and Mexico in his sights too. That military build up in the Caribbean isn't going home for a while. Decent article in Politico on the issue. After Venezuela operation, Trump says the whole hemisphere is in play - POLITICO https://share.google/ePsBI6QpVu6qXur6Z

Thanks for posting that. So mention was made of Russia taking Ukraine, and the US taking Venezuela, both in the US Congress in 2019 and on Russian state TV in 2020. Also interesting to note that Russia mention that they could interfere in the election, and do something, to help get Trump elected. What's been murky as anything since re-election is that all the Russia/US discussions have been clandestine. I dread to think what's been discussed/agreed there. The Russian 2020 TV discsussion below, with subtitles. https://x.com/davetroy/status/2007575436847616410?s=20

No re the first bit, and they UN have shown themselves to be a busted flush time and again, not least re Israel.

... pending a safe transition...to US people/puppets. Fecking shameful.

Jacket

He brings all the psychophants to the yard. Cue western leaders calling for restraint, whilst seeking to suggest that the world is a safer/better place without Maduro.