Scrutable

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:33 pm

he finds out nobody wants the troops' working language to be French.

And we can't use German as in a battle situation you can''t always wait until the end of of all the compound nouns to find out what the verb was going to be.... particularly if your commander gets killed mid-sentence.

Example:-

"Extremely important! All you people here but excluding me, the green-small-tank-wrecking-rocket-propelled-handheld-cannon, to the black-woods-near-the-castle, at a single moment in the future, with the captain-of-the-under-sea-boat's-official-fabric-for-the-head, the green-small-tank-wrecking-rocket-propelled-handheld-cannon-fuel-stuff, in the green-small-tank-wrecking-rocket-propelled-handheld-cannon-fuel-stuff-container, on the green-small-tank-wrecking-rocket-propelled-handheld-cannon-fuel-stuff-container-tracked-armoured-vehicle, at this moment and carrying on until an indefinite time in the future, must AAAARRGGHHHH!!"

"The-large-semen-producing-external-bodily-organs-of-the-male-cow!!!!"



ETA: Jokes about German sentence structure are the third most popular form of joke online just after dick jokes and that joke about the ferret dancing on the saucepan. FACT!

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:33 pm

plodder wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:27 pm

Did leavers mention conscription of children into an EU army by 2017? I don't remember that bit.

That's what Martin Y said. I was living in Brazil at the time, so nothing came through my door about it at all (except my postal vote).

Sorry, I misremembered the propaganda, 2017 was when millions of Turks were going to swarm over and murder us all in our beds, not when our kids would be conscripted.

The list of things that voting Remain would cause were;

• No parliament, no democratic voice.

• The UK broken up into regions.

• NHS privatised by TTIP.

• No more queen or royal family.

• Visa-free access for Turkey 2017.

• EU armed forces, no British.

It all seems so long ago now, when people spent a year just making sh.t up about what crazy stuff would happen if we recklessly didn't change anything.

This is providing me with some bleak amusement


https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... 1A59066B51


Sir Desmond Swayne
(New Forest West) (Con)

UK aid promoted trade in Africa by making borders seamless through digitising all the administrative processes. Is that on our agenda for trade with the EU at all? It is monstrous that we are filling in forms.

Finally I've got one!

And I mean a genuine one, not a sarky* one, and it's only taken 6 years of the combined intellectual might of 17.4 million racist fuckwits to come up with it. (H/T to many others for pointing it out).

Our absolute sh.t-show of a response to Ukrainian refugees isn't accidental, or due to incompetence, or even primarily malice, it is a deliberate and cynical decision to dissuade any refugee from considering to come to the UK. Stick up so many ridiculous and Kafkaesque hurdles of applying for un-necessary visas, down to the pettiest of levels of not printing enough forms, not telling anyone where the visa centres are and forcing people to queue in the snow for hours when warm, empty waiting rooms are available. All this in the hope that the message will spread and the refugees will simply give up and apply elsewhere regardless of how less-suitable those other options might be. The Hostile Environment turned to up to Eleventy.


None of that would be possible if we were still in the EU. Global Britain finally reclaiming its borders.

I can't say it is giving me the warm and fuzzies though however I imagine millions of Leavers will go to bed tonight quietly smiling to themselves on a job well done and that Britain is now finally the sort of country they always dreamed it could be and hope it will continue to be.

No word yet if the Daily Mail will advertise a commemorative plate showing a Ukrainian pensioner huddled up in the snow queuing outside a warm and brightly-lit, but definitely not-open, British Visa Centre to proudly display our contribution to the Ukrainian Crisis.









*well only a bit

Little waster wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 11, 2022 11:14 am

Finally I've got one!
...
I imagine millions of Leavers will go to bed tonight quietly smiling to themselves on a job well done and that Britain is now finally the sort of country they always dreamed it could be and hope it will continue to be.

No word yet if the Daily Mail will advertise a commemorative plate showing a Ukrainian pensioner huddled up in the snow queuing outside a warm and brightly-lit, but definitely not-open, British Visa Centre to proudly display our contribution to the Ukrainian Crisis.

I'm not sure you do have one. A quick search of the Daily Mail website reveals these articles:

• Government's refugee scheme descends into chaos as Liz Truss passes buck to Priti Patel for visa shambles as it emerges 'only 50 Ukrainians had been granted permission to come to Britain' - and Boris admits he has no idea on numbers which contains a sidebar "Why are we letting so few Ukrainians into UK... and how can this be improved? The big questions in refugees row "
• 
  Tory MP calls for Priti Patel to QUIT over Ukraine refugee shambles as Home Office admits UK's 'Calais' visa centre is actually 70 miles away in LILLE and not yet open - as ministers say 500 people have now been approved and warn some are faking papers
• 
  Boris says Britons will be able to invite thousands of Ukrainian refugees into their homes as Tories slate 'inhumane' government stance - with 1,000 visas now approved and Lille visa centre FINALLY opening tomorrow
• Visa rules are FINALLY eased for Ukrainian refugees as Priti Patel caves into pressure and allows them to apply to enter UK without visiting a processing centre after Tory infighting over the Government's response

These all seem to contain quite a lot of coverage of conservatives saying the current policy is both wrong and not even working as intended. When even the Daily Mail is attacking an immigration policy as too strict you know it must be quite appalling, so I think very many Leavers are quite dissatisfied or even thoroughly appalled.

Greased-Frog asked the readers of the Sun and the Express for their top Brexit benefits which gives some indication of the quality of the current contents of his Big Ring-Binder of Brexit Benefits*.

That went about as well as could be expected.

Out of 2000 responses they managed to come up with ... NINE!

The fact they couldn't even pad it out to the standard ten should have been their first warning.

Unsurprisingly most had nothing to do with the EU and were all things we could have done while inside in the EU but chose not to as they were batshit.

Otherwise they were all standard Tory wet-dreams about reducing workers rights, endangering the public and rewarding unethical employers.

The only other thing they had in common was how mind-numbingly trivial they were, mostly dealing with edge cases for some minor facet of UK (not EU) legislation of one specific type of company or product, so even if implemented they'd have made no appreciable positive difference to anyone's lives, rounding errors of rounding errors of rounding errors.

And remember that was their very best suggestions from thousands of ideas from millions of their True-BeLeavers as solicited by two of their biggest organs. I'd say it is probably not going well for them.




*I'm guessing a set of card dividers written out in immaculate copper-plate, a wine-stained napkin with "Passport for Fish?" scrawled on in drunken crayon and half a stale Yorkie bar which got misplaced circa October 2020.

So they're apparently we can:

1) relax the laws on Fracking, screw the climate
2) have MOAR POWERFUL Vacuum Cleaners
3) go mad with Experimental Treatments and GM Food Regulations
4) Max out exploitation in defintely not an unsafe way through getting rid of Van Operators' Licences
5) have MOAR POWERFUL Electric Bicycles
6) have (Who needs experts anyway) Shorter Medical Training
7) f.ck the Rights of Agency Workers
8) 'cos my brane hurts... we can make it easier to calculate Holiday Pay
9) PAT? never 'erd of him... bin Electrical Safety Regulations

Out of the apparently 2000 different ideas, that's what they came up with. Wow.

I saw that list on FB, posted by Best for Britain but attributed to the Express, and I did wonder what the Express's readers would make of it.

The top idea is to make it easier for fracking companies to set up operation. Is that what Express readers want? Fracking in their back yard, with the planning rushed through? Think of the house prices! Is that what they voted for? (Though of course it has f.ck all to do with Brexit.) Less regulation of goods vehicle drivers, reduced medical training for pharmacists. These are their best ideas. Is this stuff Express readers will lap up? I'm not seeing it.

In all seriousness, this would have happened a lot sooner and with a bigger fanfare for the bonfire of EU red tape if it hadn't been for the Grenfell disaster. That put the "elf 'n safety gorn mad" genie back in its bottle for a few years as people rediscovered that both health and safety are kinda important and letting people bolt plastic panels to the side of homes needs a moment's consideration.

Little waster wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 06, 2022 1:52 pm

Greased-Frog asked the readers of the Sun and the Express for their top Brexit benefits which gives some indication of the quality of the current contents of his Big Ring-Binder of Brexit Benefits*.

That went about as well as could be expected.

Out of 2000 responses they managed to come up with ... NINE!

The fact they couldn't even pad it out to the standard ten should have been their first warning.

Unsurprisingly most had nothing to do with the EU and were all things we could have done while inside in the EU but chose not to as they were batshit.

Otherwise they were all standard Tory wet-dreams about reducing workers rights, endangering the public and rewarding unethical employers.

The only other thing they had in common was how mind-numbingly trivial they were, mostly dealing with edge cases for some minor facet of UK (not EU) legislation of one specific type of company or product, so even if implemented they'd have made no appreciable positive difference to anyone's lives, rounding errors of rounding errors of rounding errors.

And remember that was their very best suggestions from thousands of ideas from millions of their True-BeLeavers as solicited by two of their biggest organs. I'd say it is probably not going well for them.




*I'm guessing a set of card dividers written out in immaculate copper-plate, a wine-stained napkin with "Passport for Fish?" scrawled on in drunken crayon and half a stale Yorkie bar which got misplaced circa October 2020.

I've watched the video, but is there a source as to how exactly how Rees Mogg has phrased the Magnificent 9 anywhere? I'm interested in 6, 'shorten medical training', which in the video initially seems to suggest initially relates only to pharmacists and paramedics, but the video then extends to Primary Medical Qualifications. There is an argument about medical training to be made (I had always thought of it as a possible benefit of Brexit, because there was an EU requirement about the length of training which didn't match UK practice very well, and was solved by a fudge). Anyway, I'm reluctant to get into detail until I know exactly what Rees Mogg is suggesting, and my Google skills have not found it so far.

I think 'higher power vacuum cleaners' is a great example. It was a law agreed by the Council of Ministers, ie ths elected heads of state, so demonstrates how EU laws have a democratic process behind them

I did chuckle at the vacuum cleaner one. Our Miele is 890 Watts and can lift a fitted carpet if it's not on the right setting. f.ck knows what would happen if it exceeded the dreaded 1400 Watts suggested, I'd be seriously worried about the wallpaper to be honest.

Allo V Psycho wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:00 pm

I've watched the video, but is there a source as to how exactly how Rees Mogg has phrased the Magnificent 9 anywhere? I'm interested in 6, 'shorten medical training', which in the video initially seems to suggest initially relates only to pharmacists and paramedics, but the video then extends to Primary Medical Qualifications. There is an argument about medical training to be made (I had always thought of it as a possible benefit of Brexit, because there was an EU requirement about the length of training which didn't match UK practice very well, and was solved by a fudge). Anyway, I'm reluctant to get into detail until I know exactly what Rees Mogg is suggesting, and my Google skills have not found it so far.

From the Horse's arse mouth https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... les-update

How on earth is 7 a benefit? It's something people have fought for for ages. Getting access to sick pay, pension, etc as an agency/temp worker is a huge improvement, especially given th proliferation of those roles, and the only ones who think it's something we should lose are owners who hate treating their workers fairly.

Fishnut wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:37 pm

... the only ones who think it's something we should lose are owners who hate treating their workers fairly.

I.e. readers of the Express...

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:39 pm

Fishnut wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:37 pm

... the only ones who think it's something we should lose are owners who hate treating their workers fairly.

I.e. readers of the Express...

How many Express readers are business owners? Most of them are people who would benefit from workers being treated fairly but they've bought into the idea that people on sick pay are swinging the lead and so support measures that are against their own interests

JQH wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:46 pm

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:39 pm

Fishnut wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:37 pm

... the only ones who think it's something we should lose are owners who hate treating their workers fairly.

I.e. readers of the Express...

How many Express readers are business owners? Most of them are people who would benefit from workers being treated fairly but they've bought into the idea that people on sick pay are swinging the lead and so support measures that are against their own interests

Express readers may be people who employ agency workers directly (eg as cleaners, carers etc). If so they'd want that to cost as little as possible.

JQH wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:46 pm

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:39 pm

Fishnut wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:37 pm

... the only ones who think it's something we should lose are owners who hate treating their workers fairly.

I.e. readers of the Express...

How many Express readers are business owners? Most of them are people who would benefit from workers being treated fairly but they've bought into the idea that people on sick pay are swinging the lead and so support measures that are against their own interests

It's the degree of short-sightedness around #7 which astounds me.

That the Brexit-voter who, on Monday, will clap themselves on the back that the temp worker next to them on their assembly line/office/shop floor is no longer getting the same pay, sick leave or holiday entitlement as them (as if that was a good thing, are you some sort of c.nt?) will, on Tuesday, be wondering why their employer now wants to shift them to onto a temporary contract too.

Baffling! What a completely unexpected turn of events.

Little waster wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:59 pm

JQH wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:46 pm

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:39 pm

I.e. readers of the Express...

How many Express readers are business owners? Most of them are people who would benefit from workers being treated fairly but they've bought into the idea that people on sick pay are swinging the lead and so support measures that are against their own interests

It's the degree of short-sightedness around #7 which astounds me.

That the Brexit-voter who, on Monday, will clap themselves on the back that the temp worker next to them on their assembly line/office/shop floor is no longer getting the same pay, sick leave or holiday entitlement as them (as if that was a good thing, are you some sort of c.nt?) will, on Tuesday, be wondering why their employer now wants to shift them to onto a temporary contract too.

Baffling! What a completely unexpected turn of events.

I may be prejudiced, but I expect that a typical Express reader retired a few years ago.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:01 pm

Little waster wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:59 pm

JQH wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:46 pm

How many Express readers are business owners? Most of them are people who would benefit from workers being treated fairly but they've bought into the idea that people on sick pay are swinging the lead and so support measures that are against their own interests

It's the degree of short-sightedness around #7 which astounds me.

That the Brexit-voter who, on Monday, will clap themselves on the back that the temp worker next to them on their assembly line/office/shop floor is no longer getting the same pay, sick leave or holiday entitlement as them (as if that was a good thing, are you some sort of c.nt?) will, on Tuesday, be wondering why their employer now wants to shift them to onto a temporary contract too.

Baffling! What a completely unexpected turn of events.

I may be prejudiced, but I expect that a typical Express reader retired a few years ago.

Not so much prejudiced, as accurate

tom p wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:04 pm

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:01 pm

Little waster wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 1:59 pm

It's the degree of short-sightedness around #7 which astounds me.

That the Brexit-voter who, on Monday, will clap themselves on the back that the temp worker next to them on their assembly line/office/shop floor is no longer getting the same pay, sick leave or holiday entitlement as them (as if that was a good thing, are you some sort of c.nt?) will, on Tuesday, be wondering why their employer now wants to shift them to onto a temporary contract too.

Baffling! What a completely unexpected turn of events.

I may be prejudiced, but I expect that a typical Express reader retired a few years ago.

Not so much prejudiced, as accurate

I love it when a prejudice comes together.

Number 5 - faster ebikes - shows how mad the entire project is.

I bought one the other day (I'll post a review on the other thread). It's imported direct from a French factory with the EU's 15 mph/25 kph restriction. The entire build, from motor to frame to chain, is designed around 25 kph. Adding power and torque or whatever it is wouldn't just be a matter of removing a speed limiter. No idea what re-engineering of the motor Bosch would need to do.

And as usual, EU manufacturers won't be designing a separate product just for one mad country. UK manufacturers won't design a product they can't sell to the EU.

Meanwhile, having electric assist over 15 mph is pointless. The bike goes faster than that, if you pedal hard or go downhill. It just doesn't have any boost. What counts more is that the motor keeps you going up a hill at 15 mph and you get a lot of acceleration out of traffic lights. If it's a mountain ebike then you don't want to be going faster on rough tracks anyway.

So the benefit is dubious, even before you get into safety aspects. It's merely an assumption that if the EU put in a regulation, that regulation must be wrong and there must be benefits from ignoring it.

I for one am looking forward to strapping a 2kW vacuum cleaner to my bike.

That should put the under-trained attending paramedic through his paces perhaps an untested treatment may help?

lpm wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:28 pm

Number 5 - faster ebikes - shows how mad the entire project is.

I bought one the other day (I'll post a review on the other thread). It's imported direct from a French factory with the EU's 15 mph/25 kph restriction. The entire build, from motor to frame to chain, is designed around 25 kph. Adding power and torque or whatever it is wouldn't just be a matter of removing a speed limiter. No idea what re-engineering of the motor Bosch would need to do.

And as usual, EU manufacturers won't be designing a separate product just for one mad country. UK manufacturers won't design a product they can't sell to the EU.

Meanwhile, having electric assist over 15 mph is pointless. The bike goes faster than that, if you pedal hard or go downhill. It just doesn't have any boost. What counts more is that the motor keeps you going up a hill at 15 mph and you get a lot of acceleration out of traffic lights. If it's a mountain ebike then you don't want to be going faster on rough tracks anyway.

So the benefit is dubious, even before you get into safety aspects. It's merely an assumption that if the EU put in a regulation, that regulation must be wrong and there must be benefits from ignoring it.

It is a stupid reason for Brexit, but a couple of points.

The cut off on most E-bikes is artificial, so it most could help you out at faster speeds if it were allowed to without modification to the motor or battery. In that case, the drive train would be able to cope with much more speed without modification because i's the power that matters - more power means more force trying to snap your chain and whatnot. Even if you did increase the power a decent drive train could cope with much more, they're pretty strong and robust already, but wear would be increased.

Most States in the USA regulate them with the cut off at 20 mph (class 1) and 28 mph (class 3, which come with additional requirements)*. The market for faster is much bigger than just the UK already, so there are faster Ebikes available, ready to go.

And I'm guessing you are not a mountain biker! They like going fast on rough tracks, it's the whole point. but nearly all the mountain bikers I know hate e-bikes because they they chew up the trails more than analogue bikes (I don't know how true this is, but it seems plausible, but I think there's a bunch of purism involved too, mind).


*Class 2 is where it comes with a throttle, if you where wondering.

lpm wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:28 pm

So the benefit is dubious, even before you get into safety aspects. It's merely an assumption that if the EU put in a regulation, that regulation must be wrong and there must be benefits from ignoring it.

Especially dumb considering the UK generally has the strictest rules on unlicensed powered vehicles. Segways have never been allowed in the UK, as far as I'm aware, and ebikes and e-motor scooters were legalised far later than in the rest of Europe.

WFJ wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 3:55 pm

lpm wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:28 pm

So the benefit is dubious, even before you get into safety aspects. It's merely an assumption that if the EU put in a regulation, that regulation must be wrong and there must be benefits from ignoring it.

Especially dumb considering the UK generally has the strictest rules on unlicensed powered vehicles. Segways have never been allowed in the UK, as far as I'm aware, and ebikes and e-motor scooters were legalised far later than in the rest of Europe.

Escooters (and other none bike Ethings) aren't properly legal in the UK yet, there's just some trials of share ones about the place, and you need a driving license.