Onslow Poly

https://c.im/@Opfoss

Less everything, everywhere, all at once, more nothing, nowhere, never.

𝄐:

Public Key

npub1prj7f4sn7httr9973ck0utj7ts8q2gq2y2mxrvnln9axeathkuns62pzdr

NIP-05 Address

opfoss_at_c.im@momostr.pink

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsq3e0y6cflt443jjlgut879e09crs9yq9z9dnpkflej7nv74mmwfcprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0d4hhxarj9ecxjmntkr0me9

Publishing to

relay.momostr.pink

Author Public Key

npub1prj7f4sn7httr9973ck0utj7ts8q2gq2y2mxrvnln9axeathkuns62pzdr

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-05-12 11:02:09 UTC

"John Swinney has 'no right' to discuss independence, says LibDem leader, [Alex Cole-Hamilton]".
If I don't tell you who he is you wouldn't know.
Shall we do a quick count and confirm?
Eh, Alex?
Eh?
All of you Unionist twats, including Reform, who none of you want to work with, received 56 seats.
SNP 58.
"Well, that's marginal."
Scottish Greens
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/116/561/261/241/221/875/original/b1c27b84f1cb19df.mp4

2026-04-07 18:52:50 UTC

"Trump says 'a whole civilisation will die tonight' if Iran doesn't make deal, as US hits Kharg Island".
Narcissistic, paedophilic hotelier threatens increasing war crimes.

2026-03-04 18:05:22 UTC

- reply

Not really, it could never last. Brewdog was a balloon that just popped when the FCA kicked its legs out from under it. I did some stuff on this previously. That sale of £33 million is a bloodbath.
"Mr Watt and Mr Dickie are understood to have made GBP 100 million between them from the sale. As a consequence, Mr Watt’s stake will drop from 35 percent to 25 percent, although he will remain the largest shareholder. Mr Dickie’s share will fall from 30 percent to 22 percent, it was reported." This was in 2017.
TSG Consumer Partners acquired a 22.3% stake in BrewDog for a total of £213 million then. This specific transaction is what gave BrewDog its highly publicized £1 billion "unicorn" valuation. But that £213 million didn't all go toward building new breweries or bars. It was split into two distinct pots:
Pot 1 (Primary Capital - £102 million): This was new money injected into BrewDog via the issuance of new preference shares and warrants. This money went directly to the company's balance sheet to fund global expansion.
Pot 2 (Secondary Capital - £110 million): This money was used to purchase existing shares from early stakeholders.
None of those shareholders are the Punks, who hold "pish" illiquids. Basically, Brewdog leveraged debt against gullibility to the tune of a £2 billion valuation, a valuation not based on actual pre tax profits, which have been non existent since 2019. Then the bubble went "pop".
This was largely because the FCA kicked their arsehole in. Basically, the FCA deemed their "investment" practices to be a bag of exploitative shite.
They officially closed "Equity for Punks" to new investors in 2021. Shortly after, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) rolled out sweeping regulatory changes, taking full effect in 2023. These rules effectively outlawed the exact gamified, FOMO driven marketing machine BrewDog used. The referral leaderboards offering exclusive merch or literal dogs, the artificial urgency, the burying of risk warnings, the lack of strict appropriateness tests to ensure investors understood illiquidity. The FCA banned it all.
At that point, Brewdog had to be an actual business. It wasn't. "POP!"
However, that pair of cunts, Watt in particular, secured their generational wealth in 2017. They continued the gouge of Punks until 2021.
The FCA gave notification that such vehicles would no longer be tolerated around 2019. It fully came into play in 2023.
Whatever that arsehole says is bullshit.

2026-03-04 13:07:50 UTC

Shut up, you Janus-faced arsehole. The entire business model was designed like this. You don't get to weep for the "punks", when the entire 'investment' strategy was a gouge; a promise of magic money, no dividend, and a party in Aberdeen.
Fuck your face-saving. I hope you get fucking leathered by someone you swindled. You have got it coming.
If you feel that badly, hand your personal wealth pro rata back to the punks, then go an live in a box.
Yeah, thought not.
Prick.
https://news.stv.tv/scotland/brewdog-founder-james-watt-i-am-heartbroken-for-hundreds-of-staff-losing-jobs

2026-02-27 13:49:26 UTC

Shush, sweet prince.
You had me at "legalise all drugs".
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/116/142/903/543/847/102/original/9e1fc1a0da1b8bbf.png

2026-02-19 13:41:38 UTC

Today's arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor should be viewed through the prism of state politics. He has been arrested for the crime which no state or embedded Monarch can tolerate—leaving a paper trail outlining corruption.
That is how hegemony falls. That is how the machine is seen.
It's not the corruption that is the issue, as it isn't with Mandelson. It is getting caught and leaving evidence.
The evidence of the bridges between networks is the issue.
So, under the bus you go.

2026-02-12 11:33:48 UTC

RE: https://c.im/@Opfoss/116057255287843517
One can't expect that the IOC has a moral position other than aggrandisement and profit on international issues.
The disqualification of Vladyslav Heraskevych proves that Rule 50.2 is not about neutrality but about curating a profitable aesthetic. It reveals a system of corporatism where the IOC acts as the Wal-Mart of nation-states, stocking countries like standardised inventory and silencing the actual citizenry.
In this view, the ban on Russia is not a moral judgement but a product recall for a "defective" brand. Heraskevych is simply a glitch in the software, a recalled doll speaking forbidden truths that threaten the family-friendly packaging.
The State is an artifact in constant construction, and the Games are merely the showroom. As Guy Debord and Simon Anholt suggest, the spectacle is the product. Nations are a commodity sold to the masses that the masses may purchase commodities from those in control of both.
#note1rpf…t2je

2026-02-12 10:46:17 UTC

(5000 character post warning)
Rule 50.2 of the Olympic Charter states: "No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas."
This presents an obvious irony, one made starkly visible by the disqualification of skeleton racer Vladyslav Heraskevych for his tribute to fallen athletes, as Rule 50.2 is itself a political statement. Its function of suppressing discord to curate a false aesthetic of "peace and harmony" ignores George Orwell’s observation that such competitions are effectively war by proxy, and effectively little more than "war minus the shooting".
Instead, this elicits a profound paradox: the abstract entity of the state is defended by regulation, yet the actual citizenry who inhabit it are permitted no right to express solidarity. As scholars Jules Boykoff and Mark James argue, this enforced neutrality strips athletes of their rights as citizens, privileging the symbols of National Olympic Committees, and the permitted symbols of statehood, over the freedom of expression enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Thus, the entities are essentialised while the human is erased. Neither the living nor the demised inhabitants of the state are permitted to be recognised in any meaningful way, for if all politics are banned, then basic expressions of human solidarity are prohibited, save for those consistent with the blandification of the event.
The narrative used could best be described as corporatism, which, in this context, refers to the organisation of society by major interest groups. Specifically, such is the fusion of state power and the commercial interests of the IOC and its partners, often particular corporate representatives of individual states. It functions as a mechanism of social control where the athlete is treated not as a distinct political actor, but as a subordinate unit within a larger, unified body. This structure prioritizes the stability and "brand" of the Games, and idealised and sanitised representations of a state over personal liberty, effectively silencing dissent to maintain a profitable, homogenous spectacle.
The primary business of this spectacle is sales: the sale of commercial goods and the sale of the nation itself as a product, and the sale of trading opportunity. In this sense, the IOC functions as the Wal-Mart of nation-states. It provides the global shelf space and dictates the strict terms of entry, stocking sovereign countries like standardised inventory. This commodification strips the nation of its complex, often messy political reality, reducing it to a palatable brand logo suitable for mass consumption.
This consumerist logic renders the Russian Federation a "defective product", and a brand line temporarily recalled due to public relations toxicity rather than moral failure. Consequently, Heraskevych is reduced to a mere accessory in this playset, reminiscent of the 1998 recall of the "Po" Teletubby doll for supposedly speaking profanities that shattered the family-friendly illusion. By expressing independent political agency, he transforms from a compliant, plush mascot into a reputation risk. He becomes the "glitch" that the corporate risk managers at the IOC must explicitly warn against to ensure the consumer does not hear the jagged reality of the war he represents.
Consequently, the Games serve as an expression of Joseph Nye's concept of "soft power". They reinforce the "essentiality" of the nation-state and obscure the reality described by Benedict Anderson: the state is an artifact in constant construction. The state requires continuous discourse to validate its existence. States are not a natural occurrence. Providing this validation is a primary function of the IOC. It is, in itself, a political act.
This hypocrisy is further illustrated by the ban on the Russian Federation. While I hold no support for the Russian state, the decision by the IOC to ban a nation undermines its own claim of apolitical neutrality. By barring the Russian state, the IOC implicitly admits that the Olympics are a theatre of state legitimacy. Therefore, enforcing Rule 50.2 against Heraskevych is not a defence of neutrality but rather the enforcement of a specific, controlled political are corporate narrative.
Such a reading encapsulates the theory of "Commercial Nationalism" and "Nation Branding" (coined by Simon Anholt). It aligns with the Situationist view (Guy Debord) that the spectacle (the Nation and the spectacles they offer) is the chief product of the current economic system, designed to facilitate the circulation of all other goods.
Nations are a commodity sold to the masses that the masses may purchase commodities from those in control of both.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/articles/c309pj8d8qqo

2026-01-28 12:58:20 UTC

Nothing says be passively compliant more than:
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/972/833/585/511/007/original/b81446d52ca52b45.png

2026-01-19 11:13:24 UTC

Every Trump error.
"Dear Jonas"
The Inaccuracy: This is a diplomatic category error. "Jonas" refers to Jonas Gahr Støre, the Prime Minister of Norway. However, the rest of the letter demands Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark (whose Prime Minister is Mette Frederiksen).
The Reality: The author is writing to the leader of Norway to demand territory owned by Denmark.
"Considering your country decided not to give me a Nobel Peace Prize..."
The Inaccuracy: While the recipient (Jonas/Norway) is technically correct regarding the Prize (the Peace Prize is indeed awarded by a Norwegian committee in Oslo), the premise is flawed because governments do not decide the winner.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee is independent of the Norwegian government. Furthermore, complaining to Norway about the Prize while simultaneously demanding Greenland from Denmark (in the paragraphs below) reinforces the confusion between the two sovereign nations.
"...for having stopped 8 wars PLUS..."
The Inaccuracy: This figure is a fabrication. While the Trump administration often claimed credit for not starting new wars, there is no historical metric by which it "stopped 8 wars."
The administration oversaw the continuation of existing conflicts (Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Yemen support). The Abraham Accords were normalization agreements, not the cessation of active "wars" between the signatories (e.g., UAE and Israel were not at war).
"Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China..."
The Inaccuracy: This ignores the existing security architecture. Denmark does not defend Greenland alone; it does so via NATO.
The United States already protects Greenland. Under the 1951 Defence of Greenland Agreement, the US maintains exclusive rights to the Thule Air Base (Pituffik Space Base) in northern Greenland. The US is already the guarantor of Greenland's physical security without needing "ownership."
"...and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway?. There are no written documents..."
The Inaccuracy: This is legally false. There are specific, internationally recognized written documents establishing Danish sovereignty.
The Treaty of Kiel (1814): When Denmark-Norway was dissolved, the treaty explicitly granted Greenland to Denmark.
The 1933 Hague Ruling: Norway once challenged Denmark’s sovereignty over East Greenland. The Permanent Court of International Justice ruled in 1933 (in a written judgment) that Denmark held valid sovereignty over the entirety of Greenland.
"...it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there also."
The Inaccuracy: This conflates exploration with administration and ignores the US's own legal history.
Renunciation of Claims (1917): The US explicitly renounced any claim to Greenland in 1917. When the US purchased the Danish West Indies (now the US Virgin Islands), part of the payment was a formal US declaration recognizing Denmark's sovereignty over Greenland.
Administration: Danish sovereignty is based on 300 years of continuous administration, colonization, and incorporation, not just "a boat landing."
"I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding..."
The Inaccuracy: A subjective hyperbole that ignores the founders and sustainers of the alliance.
Figures like Harry S. Truman (who signed the treaty), Dwight D. Eisenhower (first SACEUR), or Lord Ismay did "more" by creating and structuring the alliance. While the Trump administration pushed for higher spending, claiming to have done "more than any other person" is historically baseless.
"...and now, NATO should do something for the USA."
The Inaccuracy: This implies NATO has never acted for the US.
The only time in history that NATO invoked Article 5 (the collective defence clause) was on September 12, 2001, in defence of the United States. NATO AWACS patrolled US skies, and European soldiers fought and died in Afghanistan for two decades in support of the US. NATO has already "done something" significant for the USA.
"The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland."
The Inaccuracy: This is a strategic non-sequitur.
As noted above, the US already has "control" of the strategic assets it needs in Greenland (Thule/Pituffik) via treaty. Changing the flag from Danish to American would add immense administrative cost (subsidizing the Greenlandic economy) with zero added military benefit that isn't already secured by the 1951 agreement.
Get your brain-dead fuckwit in order, USA. Get your brain-dead fuckwit in order.

2026-01-18 11:19:00 UTC

Your cut-out and keep guide to The Nandy Doctrine of who decides on Self-determination.
(Image generated).
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/915/821/906/889/760/original/8ae4fe703526b827.png

2025-12-28 20:40:02 UTC

I do not mourn Brigitte Bardot, as I do not mourn those engaged in race hate.
I may still listen to her work with Gainsbourg, but she was an unrepentant National Front supporter.
There is nothing to miss.
1992 (Political): Bardot marries Bernard d’Ormale, a close industrialist advisor to Jean-Marie Le Pen (founder of the Front National). This marriage marks her formal entry into the party's inner circle.
1997 (Conviction): Convicted and fined approximately €1,500 (10,000 Francs) for comments made in Le Figaro in 1996, where she stated: "My country, France, my homeland, my land is again invaded by an overpopulation of foreigners, especially Muslims."
1998 (Conviction): Convicted for inciting racial hatred after commenting on the massacre of civilians in Algeria, declaring in a statement that she "did not want to see such throat-slitting people" in France.
2000 (Conviction): Convicted and fined 30,000 Francs for comments in her book Le Carré de Pluton (1999), in which she wrote a letter to "my dear France" lamenting that the country was being "invaded by a foreign overpopulation" and attacking Muslims.
2004 (Conviction): Convicted and fined €5,000 for inciting racial hatred in her 2003 book, Un cri dans le silence (A Scream in the Silence).
The Offense: She wrote about the "Islamicization of France," referring to Muslim immigrants as "invaders" and "barbarians" who were turning France into a "filthy, dangerous, and uncontrolled" place. She also criticized "race-mixing."
2008 (Conviction): Convicted and fined €15,000 for inciting racial hatred.
The Offense: In a 2006 letter to then-Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy regarding Eid al-Adha (ritual slaughter), she wrote: "I am fed up with being led by the nose by this whole population that is destroying us, destroying our country by imposing its acts."
2012 (Political): As Marine Le Pen runs for president, Bardot publicly endorses her, calling her the "Joan of Arc of the 21st century." She actively aids Le Pen in securing the 500 mayoral signatures required to run for office.
2014 (Political): Bardot reaffirms her allegiance in an interview with Paris Match: "I wish for her [Marine Le Pen] to save France... She is the only one capable."
2017 (Political): Before the presidential election, she urges French citizens not to vote for Emmanuel Macron, stating, "If Macron passes, it’s the death of France," and renews her support for Marine Le Pen.
2019 (Legal Incident): Bardot sends a letter to the Prefect of Réunion (a French overseas territory), describing the inhabitants as "natives who have kept their savage genes" (autochtones ayant gardé leurs gènes de sauvages) and citing "degenerate populations."
2021 (Conviction): A court in Saint-Denis de La Réunion fines her €20,000 for "public insults with a racist character" stemming from the 2019 letter. This is her heaviest financial penalty to date.
2022 (Political): In an interview with Valeurs Actuelles, she confirms she will vote for Marine Le Pen or Éric Zemmour (another far-right candidate), maintaining her stance that France is in decline due to immigration.
Total Racism-Related Convictions: At least 6 (1997, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2021).
Political Stance: Unwavering public support for the Le Pen family (Jean-Marie and then Marine) from 1992 to the present.
So long, "Marianne".

2025-12-24 19:44:01 UTC

https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/776/249/740/895/219/original/1b36009fa127e750.png

2025-12-23 20:04:43 UTC

*Cracks neck. "Yeah, I'll play."*
Greta Thunberg was arrested under the Terrorism Act for displaying a sign that read: "I SUPPORT PALESTINE ACTION PRISONERS".
The police allege she was displaying support for a proscribed (banned) organization. However, a linguistic analysis reveals a critical distinction. The police are reading keywords; grammar dictates she was supporting people, not an organization.
Here is how Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL)—a tool used to analyse how language functions in real contexts—deconstructs the sign to show why the arrest is linguistically flawed.
In English, when we group words together to name something (like "Red delicious apple" or "Palestine Action Prisoners"), there is always one word that anchors the meaning. We call this the Head or the Thing. Everything else is just decoration or categorization.
Let's look at Greta's object of support: "Palestine Action Prisoners"
The Head (The Thing): PRISONERS
This is the core reality of the sentence. The physical beings she is referencing are incarcerated people.
The Classifier: PALESTINE ACTION
In grammar, this functions as a Classifier. Its only job is to tell us which type of prisoners we are talking about. It restricts the category.
To prove this, we can swap the classifier for something else. This is called the commutation test.
If she wrote "I support [remand] prisoners," she is not saying she "supports remand" (keeping people in jail). She is supporting the people subject to that condition.
If a lawyer says "I defend [murder] suspects," they are not "defending murder." They are defending the suspects.
The police have conflated the Classifier (the label) with the Thing (the people). Linguistically, you cannot simply lift the modifier "Palestine Action" out of the phrase and claim it is the object of her support. It is glued to the word "Prisoners."
Linguists use a system called Transitivity to map "who does what to whom." It traces the energy of the verb.
The Actor (Doer): "I" (Greta)
The Process (Verb): "Support"
The Goal (Target): "Prisoners"
Imagine the sentence as an arrow. The arrow of "Support" is fired by Greta. It flies over the words "Palestine Action" and lands squarely on "Prisoners."
Grammatical Reading: Greta → Support → Prisoners (who happen to be associated with Palestine Action).
Police Reading: Greta → Support → Palestine Action (the organization).
By ignoring the word "Prisoners," the legal interpretation creates a new sentence that Greta did not write. She is validating the human rights of the individuals (the Goal), not the manifesto of the group (the Classifier).
Language doesn't happen in a vacuum. We must look at the second line of the sign to understand the first. This is called Appraisal Analysis—how we judge value and stance.
The sign reads:
"I SUPPORT PALESTINE ACTION PRISONERS"
"I OPPOSE GENOCIDE"
The second line acts as a "decoder key" for the first.
"Oppose Genocide" sets a moral framework. It is a statement about humanitarian law and saving lives.
Because the bottom line is about human rights (opposing death/genocide), the top line must be read in the same context.
She is not supporting "Palestine Action" because she loves their logo or their specific tactics; she is supporting the prisoners because she views them as victims of the same system she is critiquing in line two. The sign frames the prisoners as humanitarian subjects (people suffering), not political agents (people acting).
The Verdict
The arrest relies on "Keyword Searching"—seeing a banned word and acting on it. But grammar relies on structure.
Structurally: She supported Prisoners.
Semantically: She supported Human Rights.
By ignoring the grammar of the Noun Group, the authorities effectively erased the word "Prisoners" from her sign, changing her statement from a defence of human rights to an endorsement of a banned group. 1/2
#HumanRights
#FreeSpeech
#RightToProtest
#CivilLiberties
#UKLaw
#GretaThunberg
#PalestineAction
#Activism
#SocialJustice
#PoliticalPrisoners
#LanguageAndPower
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/770/576/198/444/555/original/630a83c78b9f4f47.png

2025-12-19 20:34:13 UTC

And how far back does one need to go to achieve that. There seems a belief that Orwell wrote a fiction.
He didn't. Arguably he wrote 1984 as a roman à clef (a novel about real life, overlaid with a façade of fiction), and predicted the future technologies which would be used. He isn't predicting a future solely, he is satirizing 1948.
Orwell served in the Indian Imperial Police in Burma. He saw first-hand how "official truth" was constructed to manage a populace that lacked the means to verify it.
Orwell’s experience at the BBC during the war—where he produced propaganda for India—directly informed the Ministry of Truth. He saw how "the reporting of such to the populace" was a curated, technical process.
The tools outlined were never a prediction of the future; they were the tools which were already in use.
Orwell was never fiction.
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/748/092/196/606/927/original/a2049ee493d336b9.png

2025-12-16 16:23:58 UTC

- reply

Neither, it's Paddy O'Byrne. The original documentary was called "Animals Are Beautiful People" (1974).
You will hear that voice in this video, about one minute in. This is basically a tribute, but he was a voice actor, so there is vocal variation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBhgvrzX8WU

2025-12-16 16:07:30 UTC

- reply

Animals do like to get turnt. We are not alone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MxNLg3rCdw

2025-12-16 15:44:07 UTC

- reply

This is, like, 14 years ago. It was an alcoholic then.
I don't think it survived.

2025-12-16 15:39:28 UTC

"Drunk moose, in a tree, faaaa la la la laaaa, there's a drunk moose in a tree, faaaaa, la la la la la."
https://youtu.be/4w-eLx9IksQ

2025-12-06 17:06:46 UTC

You fools. You absolute fools. You had the chance. The opening was there. You could've had ever deeping meanings to confuse and perplex the journalists. You could've invoked the aged British word for grumble and simultaneously invoked a children's T.V. series from a bygone era.
You could've gone with Rhubarb & Custard.
https://www.nbcnews.com/world/united-kingdom/tower-london-closed-custard-crumble-thrown-crown-jewels-rcna247728

2025-12-05 13:21:40 UTC

https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/667/160/109/563/979/original/8c4ccaadb607d51e.png

2025-12-05 10:49:16 UTC

- reply

I think you will find that is very wrong. I believe it is this:
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/115/666/557/545/339/098/original/12c18f8b3a060f6c.png

2025-11-26 16:57:04 UTC

- reply

Come on. They are well online to getting a good Tramp The Dirt Down, being the spawn of Blair, who was the first "red" Thatcher.
I know hate isn't a useful emotion, but I have a good amount for them.

2025-11-26 13:30:52 UTC

Rachel Reeves, accounts gets chippy.
The Chancellor used the Budget to announce an £828m funding boost for Holyrood.
In a swipe at the SNP, Reeves said: "I didn't quite catch that from the SNP."
She then claimed the leader of Scottish Labour was responsible for the extra cash: "Because Anas Sarwar asked us to."
Of course, this is more to do with "white-knighting" Anas Sarwar. How does white-knight framing work?
1. Attribution of Agency (The "White Knight" Frame)
The Rhetoric: By stating the funding came "Because Anas Sarwar asked us to," Reeves removes the agency from the Scottish Government (the democratically elected body) and the Barnett Formula (the structural mechanism).
The Implication: This frames the funding not as a right or a calculation, but as a favor. It creates a clientelist dynamic where Scotland only receives "gifts" if it asks through the "correct" intermediary—in this case, the Scottish Labour leader.
2. Negative Capability (Diminishing the SNP)
The Rhetoric: "I didn't quite catch that from the SNP."
The Implication: This is a performative dismissal. It implies the SNP is voiceless, ineffective, or irrelevant in the corridors of power. It suggests that having an SNP government is a blockage to funding, whereas a Labour figure (even one not in government) has the "keys" to the Treasury.
3. The "Viceroy" Dynamic
This rhetoric bypasses the concept of devolution (two governments working as equals) and re-establishes a hierarchy where London dispenses funds based on personal relationships within the Labour party.
Summary: Why this is about Sarwar, not Scotland
This announcement was designed as a campaign tool for the 2026 Scottish Parliament election.
If the funding were purely for Scotland's benefit, it would be presented as a necessary adjustment to public services or a Barnett consequential. By explicitly linking the money to Anas Sarwar's personal request, Reeves is signalling to Scottish voters: "The path to money is no longer through the SNP shouting at us; it is through Anas whispering to us."
It positions Sarwar as a de facto leader who can deliver results from Westminster that the SNP cannot, attempting to make him look like a "First Minister in waiting" who has the special clearance required to unlock the UK Treasury.
A viceroy (/ˈvaɪsrɔɪ/) is an official who reigns over a polity in the name of and as the representative of the monarch of the territory.
And now, here is The Proclaimers:
https://youtu.be/SdXeM4bHBhk

2025-11-23 13:09:57 UTC

- reply

2/2
3. The Vibrating Fork (Hapifork)
Price: $99 The Superior Alternative: A stainless steel fork ($2) and basic etiquette.
A fork designed to help you lose weight by eating slower.
The "Smart" Feature: It contains a motion sensor that tracks how many bites you take per minute. If you eat too fast, the fork vibrates in your mouth to tell you to slow down.
The Stupid Reality: It has to be charged. If you run out of battery, you just have a very heavy, thick fork. Also, users reported that if you "scoop" your food (like peas) rather than "stab" it, the fork doesn't register the bite, incentivising you to eat like a shovel to trick the algorithm.
Eating like a peasant? Shovelling the grub in there like a pig at a trough? The Hapifork brings you all the joy of being hit on the head with a guide to table manners by a Victorian mistress, all for the low cost of $99. It is essentially a vibrator for your teeth that rattles your dentures when you enjoy your meal too much.
4. The Egg Tray with an App (Quirky Egg Minder)
Price: $50 The Superior Alternative: The cardboard carton the eggs come in (Free) + Eyes.
Numerate enough to earn currency to purchase useless goods, but too lazy to count to twelve? The Quirky Egg Minder is the kitchen egg accountant you never thought you needed.
The "Smart" Feature: It connects to Wi-Fi to tell you how many eggs you have left while you are at the store. It has LED lights next to each egg to tell you which one is the "oldest."
The Stupid Reality: It turned a glance into a tech support issue. Most people eat eggs in the order they grab them, rendering the LED "aging" system useless. If the battery died or the Wi-Fi disconnected, it often reported you had zero eggs when you had a full tray. It solved the non-existent problem of "egg blindness" by introducing the very real problem of "connectivity failure."
5. The Hairbrush with a Microphone (Kérastase Hair Coach)
Price: $200 The Superior Alternative: A comb (invented approx. 5500 B.C. in Ancient Persia).
The "Smart" Feature: It has a microphone that listens to the sound of your hair breaking. It also has an accelerometer to tell you if you are brushing too hard.
The Stupid Reality: It requires you to sync your hair-brushing data to an app. It "gamifies" brushing your hair, giving you a "hair quality score."
It must be noted that the "hair quality score" has nothing to do with the actual biological state of your keratin; it is simply a game score. It effectively turns your morning routine into a round of Guitar Hero for your scalp, where you must hit the strokes perfectly to avoid a low score, only the prize is anxiety rather than applause.
Archaeologists date the first combs to 5500 B.C. For over 7,000 years, humans—from Cleopatra to the architects of Ayurvedic medicine—managed to maintain their hair without a microphone. We could make a joke about the unruliness of Medusa’s hair here, but a microphone on a hairbrush wouldn’t do much for her split roots; every time a viper struck the bristles, the accelerometer would trigger a "Brushing Force Warning."
The Verdict
We are filling our homes with landfills-in-waiting. We are trading simple mechanics for complex, fragile software.
If a normal kettle breaks, you can still boil water in it on a stove. If a smart kettle breaks, it’s a paperweight that might be DDOS-ing a server. Remember that the next time AWS-East goes down.

2025-11-23 13:09:32 UTC

The Internet of Things: A Hall of Shame
I recently saw a post describing a "smart" kettle that required an app or voice command to boil water. The user noted, "I can have tea as long as they have a wifi connection. Welcome to the 21st century."
This is the defining characteristic of modern tech-horror: a device made functionally inferior to its "dumb" ancestor by the addition of a microchip. The failure mode of a normal kettle is a pot; the failure mode of a smart kettle is a brick.
If you think the kettle is bad, here are five devices that prove we have peaked as a species and are now sliding rapidly backward.
1. The $400 Bag Squeezer (The Juicero)
Price: $400 (Launch price: $700) The Superior Alternative: Dieter Rams’ classic Braun Citrus Juicer ($60) or Human Hands ($0).
Juicero was a Wi-Fi-connected cold-press juicer. You bought proprietary bags of chopped fruit, put them in the machine, and it pressed them.
The "Smart" Feature: It read a QR code on the bag to ensure it hadn't expired. If the internet was down or the bag was expired, it would refuse to make juice. It is vital to note that the QR code checked the expiry of the bag, not the actual juice quality.
The Stupid Reality: Bloomberg News revealed that if you just squeezed the bag with your hands, you got the same amount of juice in the same amount of time. It was a $400 rolling pin that required a software update to function.
Furthermore, the machine’s refusal to operate on "expired" bags highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of biology. The main selling point was the ability to bulk-make juice to store. But juice is already pre-stored in nature's perfect packaging: fruit. An unpeeled orange is essentially juice with a shelf-life, contained in a biodegradable wrapper. The Juicero was a subscription service for squeezing a bag, offering less functionality than a mechanically rotated plastic cone from the 1970s.
2. The Bluetooth Salt Shaker (Smalt)
Price: $199 The Superior Alternative: Peugeot Paris u'Select Salt Mill ($45) + JBL Go Speaker ($30) + LED Candle ($10). Total: $85.
"Smalt" is a large plastic centrepiece that holds salt. It looks like an "ergonomically" designed, off-brand Waterpik.
The "Smart" Feature: It has a Bluetooth speaker (because you want your salt to play the soft jazz of Kenny G) and mood lighting, because you want your salt shaker to be a candle too. You can "dispense" salt by pinching a circle on your smartphone screen or asking Alexa to "dispense one teaspoon of salt."
The Stupid Reality: It requires batteries and a firmware connection to use gravity. The dispensing mechanism is a study in anti-ergonomics. To use the app, you must hold the heavy dispenser over your food with one hand. You must hold your phone with the other. However, a "pinch" gesture requires two fingers on the screen. Unless you place the phone on the table—taking your eyes off the food—or have a prehensile tail, the geometry of seasoning your soup is ridiculous.
Alternatively, you can talk to it. Because nothing kills the vibe of a dinner party faster than shouting commands at your table setting. This is objectively less functional than an electric button-mill (one thumb), a manual mill (two hands, one action), or the pinnacle of culinary interface design: putting your fingers in a bowl of salt.
1/2

2025-11-17 10:45:58 UTC

Note to Rachel Reeves, accounts, from Shabana Mahmood, centre of hell: as you can see, Rachel, it is entirely possible to asset strip from an individual for the purported benefit of the state, but it must always be from marginal to middle-class; never from wealthy downward.

2025-11-02 12:10:46 UTC

- reply

You would think that with Reform and their voters' concerns with "grooming gangs", "child protection", and the destination of asylum seekers that they would be all over the loss of children from the asylum system.
Though, I suppose it is difficult to balance that and "let them die in the sea."

2025-10-23 06:52:40 UTC

- reply

Ed, mate, we don't need any more leccy. We have tonnes of the stuff, so to speak. So much so that we could give it away to Scots, and sell the rest to you and yours and still make a bit of a profit.
So, naw. Beat it. Stick your nuclear reactors in Kent, they'll be closer to the big electricity suck point of London that way. Slap them right in Sussex, Middlesex, Wessex.
Build them over Westminster for all I care. We don't need it. If Scotland is to be the battery for London, we can have that chat after independence.

2025-10-22 07:50:08 UTC

Let's just nationalise Turnberry and Menie and call it quits.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c051mzgyq2vo

2025-10-17 13:25:35 UTC

Seeing as Maccabi Tel Aviv is such a great bunch of lads, I've prepared their song book so you can join in:
"יימח שמם של הערבים" (Yimach shemam shel ha'Aravim)
"May the names of the Arabs be erased/blotted out." (A common, severe curse meaning "death to Arabs" or "destroy the Arabs." Obviously, they mean that literally, not metaphorically, as Bob Vylan did.)
"מוות לערבים" (Mavet la'Aravim)
"Death to Arabs."
"אולה, אולה, שהצבא ינצח, ושיזיין את הערבים" (Ole, ole, sheha'Tzava yenatz'ach, v'sheyeza**en et ha'Aravim)
"Olé, olé, let the IDF win, and fuck/ rape the Arabs." (The vulgarity in the original is maintained for uncensored accuracy.)
"אין יותר ילדים בעזה, למה אין שם בית ספר" (Ein yoter yeladim b'Aza, lama ein sham beit sefer)
"Why is there no school in Gaza? There are no children left there."
"סלים טועמה מחבל" (Salim Tuama Mechabel)
"Salim Tuama is a terrorist."
"שישרף לכם הכפר" (Sheyisra'ef
lachem ha'kfar)
"May your village burn."
Good times for everyone. I expect Keir to be rattling these out tonight in full-throat.
Scotland passed legislation, later repealed, to deal with offensive songs such as, The Famine Song, from Rangers, which was notorious for the line "the famine is over; why don't they go home?", which is pale by comparison. As is "Hello, hello, we are the Billy Boys... Up to our knees in Fenian blood / Surrender or you'll die", referencing the events of 1690, which many of their support don't even understand.
For the Celtic side most of the songs axed were due the proscription of the IRA and associated bodies, so out went Irish Republican/IRA songs (e.g., "The Boys of the Old Brigade," "Roll of Honour").
By-the-by, did you know that there is not one Israeli organisation on the Proscription list?
But let's all enjoy the Maccabi Tel Aviv singalonga IDF because genocide is such a laugh.
Come on Keir, sing up for your lads.
Hey, make up a song, lad. Maccabi Tel Aviv also like to:
Celebrate Extremists: In the past, the "songbook" has reportedly contained celebrations of mass murderer Baruch Goldstein and Yitzhak Rabin's assassin Yigal Amir.
They are also keen on:
Homophobic Chants: The fanbase has also been subject to disciplinary action over anti-gay chants directed at rival players.
Sing up, Keir, sing up.

2025-10-17 08:36:54 UTC

- reply

Those terms being often conflated in a widely accepted but fundamentally unfit definition of anti-semitism as proposed, ratified and used as a guiding principle—IHRA definition of antisemitism.
The definition started badly, has been heavily criticised, including various Jewish groups, but was broadly accepted in the countries you might expect.
This, of course, led to issues in academia and journalism as certain lobby groups will then cite the definition against any perceived criticism.
It's easier and cheaper to simply retract.
The definition is, IMHO, junk, not fit for purpose and a means to chill speech, particularly against Israel, this enforcing the status quo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IHRA_definition_of_antisemitism

2025-10-16 08:51:02 UTC

- reply

It has been on and off on Spanish news for quite some time, normally with Repsol execs telling us about the benefits of democracy in Venezuela.
I am inclined to think this is more a two (or even three or more) birds with one stone action. This obviously includes the distraction and the potential to nix programmes and oversight during shutdown.
However, the U.S., and numerous allies, have had avaricious eyes on Venezuelan oil for quite some time.
So much time, in fact, that the current Nobel Peace Prize winner has been advocating for "democracy" since at least 2005, which is when she had a chat with Dubya in the Oval Office. Then, the grants from the National Endowment for Democracy did start to flow. While the initial grant was only $53,000 dollars, that doesn't exclude other funding bodies being involved. The NED has been described as the "white gloves of the CIA". This is somewhat backed by Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing the NED, and who was quoted in a 1991 interview with The Washington Post saying, "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." This statement is frequently cited by critics as a direct acknowledgement of the NED taking over former CIA functions.
As Machado doesn't have any issues talking to or praising fascist leaders, including Trump, Bolsonaro, and Milei. This has led to her being seen as the "Bolsonaro of Venezuela", given her anti-communist, populist, confrontational, and anti-establishment rhetoric. Certainly, Maduro paints her in this light, but this view extends far beyond Maduro. Effectively, her view aligns with Trump, Bolsonaro, and Milei, which I think we can assume isn't pluralistic and democratic.
I think that it would not be illogical to assume the Mann Doctrine remains in full effect, and "democracy" is the Trojan Horse for regime change.
In that light, the attacks on narco-boats become a provocation. Certainly, Colombia and Venezuela see it this way, with Colombia having involved themselves by stating that some killed on the boats attacked by Trump were actually their citizens. The U.S. denied this, stating the claims were "baseless and reprehensible," before anonymous confirmation.
Effectively, this looks like a provocation, especially against Venezuela, where narco-boats will be attacked until there is a suitable point of escalation to justify military action, et voilà!, the largest oil reserves on the planet, with around 303.8 billion barrels proven, comes into play.
There are issues with Venezuelan crude being sour, and requiring more investment for large scale extraction and profit maximisation, but the proven reserves are still huge. The upper estimate is around 500 billion barrels. A lot of variables come into play, but crudely, this is a dollar value of between $2.25 Trillion on a pessimistic outlook and $25 Trillion for an optimistic outlook.
So, Machado gets a free bump, the "democracy everywhere" argument gets put back in play, everyone got a free laugh at Trump, yet it all still aligns with over 20 years of U.S. foreign policy, which is, "it is unfortunate that Venezuela elected a terrible, corrupt, undemocratic ruler who runs a socialist petro- and narco-state. We will help with democracy. They fix elections and everything. We will help them."
303.8 billion barrels of, albeit sour, crude and the ability to damage OPEC never even entered their minds.
I am sure that the states of the former "Seven Sisters" would not object to more control being back in their hands.
Move along, nothing to see.

2025-10-07 18:50:39 UTC

So, Michelle Mone basically wrote a snide letter saying "ram your peerage", but as that actually doesn't remove her peerage, and she also hasn't resigned her peerage, it is just a meaningless, tantrum with no effect.
And she is going to hold on to her little £300 a day sinecure "until she clears (her) name".
https://news.stv.tv/politics/michelle-mone-has-no-wish-to-return-to-lords-as-tory-peer

2025-09-29 16:25:09 UTC

Andy Burnham. Andy Burnham. This is the Labour solution? That's just Starmer in "King of the North" flavour.
I mean, I was never voting Labour, but in a straight choice between Andy Burnham for anything and a faeces popsicle, chuck the brown ice-pole my way.
I mean, let's see the two-faced dealings already from a position of no credible challenge.
"Burnham says 'now not the time' for Starmer's Digital ID plans."
Now, effectively he is just a stalking horse, and not a good one either, as he currently has no means to challenge Starmer. This is being reported elsewhere as "Burnham stands against id cards", but it is an equivocation.
And when will be the right time, Andy? Never, tomorrow, the day after, when your future donors demand it?

2025-09-27 13:09:46 UTC

On ID cards for Britain:
"Will curb the prospect of work for illegal migrants, a significant factor driving small boat crossings."
'Oh no', thinks the illegal migrant, 'how will I be able to work in the black economy without a Britcard?'
That is how moronic this is.
"Scheme will also make it easier for the public to access the services they are entitled to."
That can be managed based on already extant IDs without need for biometrics. But wouldn't the insurance industry love to be able to find a way to deny claims via direct access to medical records, especially hand in hand with a semi-privitised NHS.
"There will be no requirement for individuals to carry their ID or be asked to produce it - but digital ID will be mandatory as a means of proving your Right to Work.
This will stop those with no right to be here from being able to find work, curbing their prospect of earning money, one of the key “pull factors” for people who come to the UK illegally."
Hi, what's your NI number? "Don't have one". No work for you.
"It will send a clear message that if you come here illegally, you will not be able to work, deterring people from making these dangerous journeys."
And how will they find out this information, prior to their journey? This is a continuation of the frankly idiotic narrative that migrants are sitting glued to the news, waiting to see which country has the least restrictions. It's nonsense. British citizens are effectively being asked to proved their right to work to deal with a miniscule problem. British citizens are the target. Migrancy is the Trojan horse.
Britain is a bin-fire.

2025-09-26 16:20:14 UTC

You know your plan is garbage when Alliance, DUP, UUP, SDLP, and Sinn Féin are all on the same side.
With one fell swoop, Keir Starmer unified Northern Ireland.
A unified Ireland is now a stone's throw away.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yv2gj5pd4o

2025-09-15 12:04:57 UTC

If a racist and a fascist says, "let's 'ave a march!", and 100,000 people turn up to that match, those people are?
"But that's just a few rotten eggs. What about the good eggs?"
There are no good eggs. It's a fucking salmonella outbreak.

2025-09-06 10:07:12 UTC

Bye, dickheads.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/06/israeli-arms-manufacturer-elbit-systems-closes-uk-facility-targeted-by-palestine-action

2025-09-04 09:59:32 UTC

Why would you probe offensive graffiti on a roundabout?
Oh yeah, it's on a street, not a tweet.
You see, Wes, and the wider Labour party, that is an additional "unintended consequence" of your yammer yesterday, with a side-order of "why shouldn't the Welsh have a right-to-reply and tell the English to shut-up." Welcome to the problem of populism and iterating all the St. George's cross bunting you have, while defending the asylum hotel protests.
The imposition of a particular symbol on a space acts to claim the space. Now, currently, while there are regional assemblies, the state is the United Kingdom. So, for the representation of the United Kingdom to stand in front of their St. George's cross bunting as a way of identifying with the twat army, overlays upon the United Kingdom proto-English nationalism being the default state for all.
The other "equal members" might not take kindly to that, as your defacto position being overlaid upon theirs diminishes their identity.
So, fuck off England.
Therein lies your quandary. England is not Scotland, Wales, nor Northern Ireland, and any attempted homogeneity cannot come from standing at a plinth bedecked in the St. George's cross.
Fuck off England.
This is further complicated by the Welsh justiciary being tied to that of England, which then results in any choice to mitigate for the protesters in England becoming the de facto position in Wales, whether they want that or not.
Fuck off England.
Now, the second problem. I'll be short and sweet. While I appreciate that graffiti is criminalised, as is the erection of many ad hoc installations, by failing to crack down on the symbolic claiming of the territory of the UK by the clowns spray painting St. George's crosses on roundabouts, you de facto make such actions permissable for all. Do you see the problem? An additional concern, particularly in light of dear Wes' "streets not tweets" jabber is the privileging of one type of literacy space over another. It becomes permissable for an incitement to violence to be acceptable for those with the digital literacy skills and financial means to create a blog. But those whose literacy requires a more direct expression are diminished.
Another "unintended" consequence.
I shall leave this, reminded of The Sound of Silence:
"And the sign said,
The words of the prophets
Are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the sounds of silence."
So, to Wes and his Labour "comrades", enjoy constructing privilege for the few.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0qlq755kjvo

2025-07-26 01:18:44 UTC

To speak out about war crimes perpetrated by US contractors and the IDF means that Anthony Aguilar is now possibly an ICE arrest waiting to happen.
https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/cy8k8045nx9o

2025-07-20 17:40:41 UTC

"We've stopped your banking because you used to have a button which provided donations to Palestine Action. We know you removed the button at the time Palestine Action was proscribed, but you know, hard diddies. Would you like to donate to genocide instead? Donation to mass-murder is still available. Perhaps a nice aid agency which fails to provide aid is up your street? How about sponsoring an IDF soldier?"
https://www.itv.com/news/2025-07-20/israel-issues-evacuation-orders-in-central-gaza-as-ceasefire-talks-stall

2025-07-20 17:32:04 UTC

Should you have a bank account with Virgin Money or Unity Trust, perhaps you should consider divesting yourself from such.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/20/two-uk-pro-palestine-organisations-have-bank-accounts-frozen-gmfp-psc

2025-07-19 17:39:44 UTC

- reply

We are up to nearly 100 arrests total, with 55 for "terrorism".
I feel so safe from terrorists.
#PalestineAction
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20rvdexj8jo

2025-07-19 17:26:50 UTC

So far today, 55 people have been arrested for terrorism offences by the combined forces of the UK police. This possibly represents the most successful counter-terrorism action in the nation's history.
The reason for this success is both farcical and pathetic.
But let us offer our congratulations to the Great British police for keeping the country safe from placards containing speech acts.
Well done, everyone.
Hurrah!
Heroes, one and all.

2025-07-19 15:44:44 UTC

If the plod keep arresting grannies at this rate, then the right wing will have to shift their politics from the radicalisation of "Muslim extremists" to the causes of "geriatric terrorism".
#PalestineAction

2025-07-16 10:26:48 UTC

It's good that Rachel Reeves will deregulate financial markets again, as it is such an obvious solution to food price inflation and the burgeoning malnourishment that medical services are seeing.
"I can't afford bread, Rachel!"
Yes, but bankers can afford incredibly lavish cakes, and I am seeing them more than I am seeing you, so fuck your sandwich.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c4g89vqp8p4t

2025-07-08 19:20:32 UTC

Aaron Rupar‬
‪@atrupar.com‬
· 3m
Tammy Bruce: "President Trump has not just the desire to ask for new ideas, he asks for them because he gets them. He knows new ideas are possible. His life is a new idea. The nature of what he's accomplished politically is a new idea."
That idea being, if we genetically crossed a lower-order ape with a fetid tangelo, what would be the result, and how much faeces could it fling?

2025-07-08 19:10:00 UTC

Why is the Scottish government spending millions on bikes for kids, improving health outcomes, softly pushing a green agenda, and providing public utility, when it could be doing something useful like cutting disability payments and SEND support, or doubling the defence budget, asks Joani Reid.
She's a fucking half-wit, and reeks of the mediocre managerialism which so marks the current incarnation of the Labour party, rather than the social revolutionary zeal of the past.
"Yes, having independent, confident, and well-actualised children is all well and good, but won't somebody count the beans, and make sure we can offer future tax-breaks to the wealthy, who, when my parliamentary career is over, may reward me for diligently looking after their interests."
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-government-forks-out-nearly-35521575

2025-07-01 19:52:24 UTC

"Death, death, death, death to Gazan babies."
Is that offensive enough now to take action? And against whom shall that action be taken against, oh British politicians, me for the offensive chant, or the perpetrators of infanticide?
SMA baby formula is also Hamas.
https://s3.c.im/media_attachments/files/114/779/704/903/602/340/original/658c1a8bd18050a5.jpg

2025-06-26 10:05:23 UTC

‘We Are All In The Gutter, but some of us are face down, admiring the true essentiality of the gutter.'