Almost as bad is plastic packaging labelled as “recyclable” and when you look, it’s Terracycle, which is a private recycling provider that is almost a scam, with few recycling points on its map and most I’ve tried not existing in reality. Terracycle is short for “terrible recycling”.

Well, why did you think they forced bytedance to sell the US arm to a joint venture controlled by his chums?

More seriously how it s twisted ?

Well, someone descended from migrants hating later migrants is pretty twisted and a bit self-loathing, don’t you think? There’s got to be something wrong to want to change the rules so you wouldn’t have existed if those rules had been in place years earlier.

Also how britain is an immigrant nation ? It s a 2000 year old country. Immigration wasnt even possible in scale 100 year ago because transportation wasnt good enough.

The country of Great Britain is only just over 300 years old, but let’s pretend you meant England, which is just under 1100 years old. Boats have existed for a long time, but you’re right that they weren’t readily available to everyone, so early mass immigration events were often linked to invasions, such as the famous Normans or less famous Dutch (most recently in 1688), or expulsions and exoduses from nearby countries, such as France (Huguenots, who were about 5% of London’s population around 1700 = 30,000, with about as many in Kent) or Flanders (the Strangers). Before England was unified, there were Angles an Vikings from across the North Sea, Saxons and Romans from mainland Europe, Celts from Central Europe before them, and farmers from Spain and Turkey before that. Before that, it gets pretty hazy, but pretty much all “Brits” are descended from a mix of these immigrants.

Proceeds to list zero policies 😀

I listed three. You might like to pretend they’re not policies or something, but Reform put them in their manifesto.

We’re using gas for the next 50 years whether it’s Reform or the Greens. That curries more favour with the US or Qatar than it does Russia. You’re reaching for that to be a “Putin policy”

Really? Are you seriously claiming that Putin doesn’t want the UK buying gas for longer? As that’s the difference between Reform and the others: Reform would build more new gas power stations, prolonging the dependency mistake, while most of the other parties will phase it out more or less quickly.

Scrapping the licence fee…

Not only, but also scrapping the BBC because they believe on-demand TV has replaced it. That’s what they wrote.

And I notice you don’t disagree that Putin would want the UK out of the European Defence Fund.

What would Putin oppose? Let’s see… the top three from Reform’s site:

• stopping the boats (I know, I know)
• defend our borders
• deport illegal migrants

Don’t make me laugh! Why would Putin oppose those? Putin would love all of them, along with anything else that makes the UK more isolated and causes squabbles with its neighbours or diverts funds from NATO-level defence to petty little border patrols. That’s why he’s paid Reform politicians like Nathan Gill so much.

Encroaching crypto-fascism. A perverse desire for control,

Or sometimes it is a real desire to be seen as tough on crime without noticing that the people who want age-verification/identity-document-duplication include some of the biggest criminals.

Age restrictions is usually due to religious voters

On what grounds, and isn’t it just a pretext like here?

Possibly propaganda, but a past government. The funder of that game, “Prevent”, was a scheme started under the ill-fated Cameron government and by 2023, I think that was the Sunak government.

Then again, why shouldn’t people who act as if they’re being radicalised in the game not expect their character to be nearly arrested in the game? It’s extremely twisted if someone from an immigrant nation like the UK starts protesting against immigration, it’s not going to end well and it’s probably better for the game to explain that reality than pretend those protests don’t have a downside.

So many to choose from! How about building more gas turbine power stations (thereby increasing demand for gas, pushing the global price up and benefitting Gazprom even if they don’t buy directly from them), cutting stamp duty on the biggest properties (including most of those bought by Russian oligarchs) and pulling out of the European Defence Fund? All straight from the last Reform manifesto and I’d bet Putin would be in favour of those, wouldn’t you?

If you don’t like those, there’s stuff like cancelling our human rights, repealing the Equalities Act and “scrapping” the BBC.

I suspect Reform would also open the floodgates to more Russian government funding, Nathan Gill style and otherwise, but they’re not daft enough to put that in their manifesto.

Maybe you could say which Reform policies would Putin oppose? There’s some he probably wouldn’t care about either way, but oppose?

The game is from 2023. Not much to do with the current government. It was also an attempt to stop radicalisation, not shame people for having stupid views on immigration.

The game when it was online would report you for taking “wrong” decision

Are you sure? The article seems to say it would have told you that your actions in the game scenario would have resulted in reporting, but the wording seems ambiguous.

Then it’s your fault for not getting involved and telling your electeds to stop allowing the hellscapes. HTH 😉

Xitter, fakebook and friends are not social (more lke antisocial), not media (as they aren’t subject to the full media regulations), and unsafe for adults too!

Can’t it be shared-fault? Most of our residential area designs suck and discourage taking children outside without cars or at least buggies.

Reform UK Re-use the worst Tories and Recycle Putin’s policies

Well, truth is often stranger than fiction. Look at the research. Once a threshhold of visibility is achieved, more is not better. Beyond a point, more is actually detrimental.

It really doesn’t, especially if it makes you look less like an ordinary human. You absolutely don’t want them to think you’re an expert rider who doesn’t need space, or something like that.

You don’t need them to see you from space. You need them to see you from just far enough away, but actually care enough not to endanger you.

Why do the anglos always have exceptions for exceptions?

History and a preference for not reopening awkward compromises until they become really really annoying. Except one.

Cyclists SHOULD be wearing/using all of these at night/in the rain, for everyone’s safety.

Wouldn’t it make walkers and animals less safe because they’re not wearing them and motorists will be looking for hi-vis instead of ordinary people and animals. It might make motorists less safe too, because fallen trees and shed loads won’t have hi-vis on but hitting them will still kill some drivers and passengers.

It always amazes me how more helmet-pushers claim to have had their lives saved than the total of all cyclists to die from non-collision head injuries (as cycle helmets aren’t intended or tested for collisions) since bikes was invented.

Yeah, the “urban camouflage” theory. Or they expect us to be slow or static like a roadworker or emergency worker and so botch the overtake.