I find I need "cowboy" glasses with no gap at the bridge to avoid the wind stinging my eyes. I wear prescription glasses. I have worn ski goggles when there were big wildfires, but they're usually too much.
mjr
joined 1 week ago
Social commentary at https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/major-incident-at-huntingdon-01-11-2025.294148/
Broadly agree. An ordinary nonce probably won't get accused of misusing the police, though.
You must be seeing some comments that I'm not.
Have you considered following the news and learning about the country despite not being required to take a citizenship test? Yet! 😉
More seriously, do you often read the Morning Star? I suspect their readers will know who Republic are.
The Civil List, if that's what you mean, was abolished in 2011, but they claim grants instead now.
It depends where you are. I think the Netherlands has a lot of 'ecotap' charging points. In the UK, e-bike chargers are proposed for travel hubs. At the moment, most seem to be simple mains sockets, but it'd be nice not to need to carry a charger around.
Allocating the cash from Crown Estate to the royals is itself controversial because it's basically a special public corporation these days, unlike the private Royal Estates of Sandringham and Balmoral which the royals actually manage. Like, why exactly should the royal family be considered to own and exploit reclaimed land and the sea bed? It's a strange throwback to the dark ages.
Also, "stipend" usually means only the Sovereign Grant, which funds only the monarch's official duties and not all the other associated costs incurred by the royals. Some of the extra is paid for by the Duchies of Lancaster (for Charles III) and Cornwall (for William), but not all. Their police, armed services, various ceremonies and some visit costs (including road closures) are paid for from general taxation. I suspect that's what this complaint is based on.
But in short, royal finances are a mess and almost like someone doesn't want a simple easy-to-read budget allocated, but it's almost certain some taxes paid for some of Andrew's policing and pomp, and there have been recent reports he asked his police to work against his accuser, which does seem a bit like misconduct in public office.
I don't expect this case to be allowed, unless Andrew has really really upset Charles III, but it's not a completely ridiculous argument.
Well, that campaign group has been in the news off and on for over 40 years and was covered extensively around the last coronation due to the pre-crime arrest of its leader and incredible police claims that people carrying sellotape and luggage straps were "going equipped to lock on" and those with paper, ink and paint were "going equipped to commit criminal damage."
It does make me wonder what the contract was like, if they couldn't claim against the contractor who installed faulty wiring.
I actually tried to research him before I made my post, all I found is a vague one paragraph mission statement and him asking for donations. No backstory, no credentials no nothing.
That in itself isn't awful. If you try to research any random newspaper author, most have nothing much visible behind them except their past works. You may be able to see past jobs, but full credentials is rare.
I know enough boomers who get all their “news” from TV and newspapers without realizing that they are being influenced and don’t form their own opinions. I don't get the reverence for legacy media that gave us some truly awful past leaders and wars.
More like https://www.specsavers.co.uk/glasses/gideon?sku=33145013