@huchano.bsky.social
Updated now. Better late than never, I suppose,
November 25, 2025 at 1:59 PM
Updated now. Better late than never, I suppose,
Great to see that Primal Scream have recovered from the shock of former member Mani's death & managed to put on a show at an expensive private members' club!
😀
😀
November 25, 2025 at 11:00 AM
Great to see that Primal Scream have recovered from the shock of former member Mani's death & managed to put on a show at an expensive private members' club!
😀
😀
November 25, 2025 at 9:19 AM
It’s 12 November, so it’s time to mark the 55th anniversary of the exploding whale of Oregon, an attempt to clear a cetacean carcass from a beach which prompted one reporter to say “The blast blasted blubber beyond all believable bounds”
November 20, 2025 at 2:33 PM
When you think they have finally ended only for some more to pop up on the barriers!
Honestly a bit creepy.
Honestly a bit creepy.
November 19, 2025 at 11:38 AM
When you think they have finally ended only for some more to pop up on the barriers!
Honestly a bit creepy.
Honestly a bit creepy.
Lest we forget the pics @michaelwolffnyc.bsky.social claims Epstein showed him, including one with girls pointing/laughing at Trump's semen-stained crotch.
I take everything he says with *more* than a pinch of salt but let's see him brought before congress - not a podcast - to testify under oath.
I take everything he says with *more* than a pinch of salt but let's see him brought before congress - not a podcast - to testify under oath.
November 17, 2025 at 3:34 PM
Lest we forget the pics @michaelwolffnyc.bsky.social claims Epstein showed him, including one with girls pointing/laughing at Trump's semen-stained crotch.
I take everything he says with *more* than a pinch of salt but let's see him brought before congress - not a podcast - to testify under oath.
I take everything he says with *more* than a pinch of salt but let's see him brought before congress - not a podcast - to testify under oath.
... and the air. Would also destroy the trees on either side. Honestly an idea so bad it made me chuckle!
November 17, 2025 at 10:38 AM
... and the air. Would also destroy the trees on either side. Honestly an idea so bad it made me chuckle!
"It would have raised £6bn from the income of non-workers such as *landlords* and pensioners, who pay the income tax but not national insurance..."
Landlords are the fish in the barrel that could be easily shot to the detriment of no one else. Mystified why they aren't squeezed hard - £30B hard. 😀
Landlords are the fish in the barrel that could be easily shot to the detriment of no one else. Mystified why they aren't squeezed hard - £30B hard. 😀
November 14, 2025 at 8:47 AM
"It would have raised £6bn from the income of non-workers such as *landlords* and pensioners, who pay the income tax but not national insurance..."
Landlords are the fish in the barrel that could be easily shot to the detriment of no one else. Mystified why they aren't squeezed hard - £30B hard. 😀
Landlords are the fish in the barrel that could be easily shot to the detriment of no one else. Mystified why they aren't squeezed hard - £30B hard. 😀
Anouska De Georgiou? Matter of opinion if she were a 'victim'...
Hey @migold.bsky.social, could you ask email recipient @michaelwolffnyc.bsky.social if he stands by claim to have been shown saucy pics of Trump *by Epstein*, and, if so, why he later stated he had no evidence of Trump's involvement?
Hey @migold.bsky.social, could you ask email recipient @michaelwolffnyc.bsky.social if he stands by claim to have been shown saucy pics of Trump *by Epstein*, and, if so, why he later stated he had no evidence of Trump's involvement?
November 12, 2025 at 2:21 PM
Anouska De Georgiou? Matter of opinion if she were a 'victim'...
Hey @migold.bsky.social, could you ask email recipient @michaelwolffnyc.bsky.social if he stands by claim to have been shown saucy pics of Trump *by Epstein*, and, if so, why he later stated he had no evidence of Trump's involvement?
Hey @migold.bsky.social, could you ask email recipient @michaelwolffnyc.bsky.social if he stands by claim to have been shown saucy pics of Trump *by Epstein*, and, if so, why he later stated he had no evidence of Trump's involvement?
Come on, it is deliberately deceptive wording!
Saying "almost 900 members voted" if the number is fewer than 200 is not justifiable.
If I were in a crowded room with 197 others I would not consider a grouping of 53 to be "a small minority".
Saying "almost 900 members voted" if the number is fewer than 200 is not justifiable.
If I were in a crowded room with 197 others I would not consider a grouping of 53 to be "a small minority".
November 8, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Come on, it is deliberately deceptive wording!
Saying "almost 900 members voted" if the number is fewer than 200 is not justifiable.
If I were in a crowded room with 197 others I would not consider a grouping of 53 to be "a small minority".
Saying "almost 900 members voted" if the number is fewer than 200 is not justifiable.
If I were in a crowded room with 197 others I would not consider a grouping of 53 to be "a small minority".
Thanks for this. Searched in vain!
If this is indeed the vote in question it would make the phrase "almost 900 members voted to keep their trans-inclusive policy" a little disingenuous: fewer than 200 voted and with over a quarter of them *against* the current policy.
If this is indeed the vote in question it would make the phrase "almost 900 members voted to keep their trans-inclusive policy" a little disingenuous: fewer than 200 voted and with over a quarter of them *against* the current policy.
November 8, 2025 at 11:35 AM
Thanks for this. Searched in vain!
If this is indeed the vote in question it would make the phrase "almost 900 members voted to keep their trans-inclusive policy" a little disingenuous: fewer than 200 voted and with over a quarter of them *against* the current policy.
If this is indeed the vote in question it would make the phrase "almost 900 members voted to keep their trans-inclusive policy" a little disingenuous: fewer than 200 voted and with over a quarter of them *against* the current policy.
"In 2024, almost 900 members voted to keep their trans-inclusive policy..."~
Is there a link to the outcome of this vote? I imagine this was a majority decision & that not *all* "almost 900 members" voted the same way.
If so, how many members voted against the "trans-inclusive policy"?
Is there a link to the outcome of this vote? I imagine this was a majority decision & that not *all* "almost 900 members" voted the same way.
If so, how many members voted against the "trans-inclusive policy"?
November 8, 2025 at 10:22 AM
"In 2024, almost 900 members voted to keep their trans-inclusive policy..."~
Is there a link to the outcome of this vote? I imagine this was a majority decision & that not *all* "almost 900 members" voted the same way.
If so, how many members voted against the "trans-inclusive policy"?
Is there a link to the outcome of this vote? I imagine this was a majority decision & that not *all* "almost 900 members" voted the same way.
If so, how many members voted against the "trans-inclusive policy"?
"About €13mn of the [€176 billion] non-monitored transactions were suspected to be related to money laundering, scams, child sexual exploitation and other criminal activity..."
Percentage wise this seems very low.
Percentage wise this seems very low.
November 6, 2025 at 4:30 PM
"About €13mn of the [€176 billion] non-monitored transactions were suspected to be related to money laundering, scams, child sexual exploitation and other criminal activity..."
Percentage wise this seems very low.
Percentage wise this seems very low.
"For parents who have buried infants born too soon, a device like the AquaWomb is a miracle in waiting..."
This could have been worded differently.
This could have been worded differently.
November 5, 2025 at 12:52 PM
"For parents who have buried infants born too soon, a device like the AquaWomb is a miracle in waiting..."
This could have been worded differently.
This could have been worded differently.
Five year obligatory rent freeze (residential & commercial).
Five percent obligatory tax on rental income (residential & commercial, with absolutely no exceptions).
Don't worry landlords, you'd survive (mostly)!
Five percent obligatory tax on rental income (residential & commercial, with absolutely no exceptions).
Don't worry landlords, you'd survive (mostly)!
November 5, 2025 at 9:48 AM
Five year obligatory rent freeze (residential & commercial).
Five percent obligatory tax on rental income (residential & commercial, with absolutely no exceptions).
Don't worry landlords, you'd survive (mostly)!
Five percent obligatory tax on rental income (residential & commercial, with absolutely no exceptions).
Don't worry landlords, you'd survive (mostly)!
Wikipedia: "In 2024, the scheme accounted for around 1 in 5 new cars purchased in the UK, with 815,000 people on the scheme, up 15% on the previous year."
Honestly had no idea it was so extensive. Not surprised it has come under the microscope - up 15% in a year? - but no idea if warranted or not.
Honestly had no idea it was so extensive. Not surprised it has come under the microscope - up 15% in a year? - but no idea if warranted or not.
November 4, 2025 at 6:55 AM
Wikipedia: "In 2024, the scheme accounted for around 1 in 5 new cars purchased in the UK, with 815,000 people on the scheme, up 15% on the previous year."
Honestly had no idea it was so extensive. Not surprised it has come under the microscope - up 15% in a year? - but no idea if warranted or not.
Honestly had no idea it was so extensive. Not surprised it has come under the microscope - up 15% in a year? - but no idea if warranted or not.