Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis
euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.
Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan.
Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem,
suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.
Without a doubt, the tabloid press are out celebrating Megs & Harry coming back to Britain, because we can safely anticipate a toe-curling festival of naffness and cringe.
Bloody hell! It’s bad enough with all the illegal economic migrants and then this? The plagues of Egypt are looking like a minor inconvenience in comparison.
Molly,
As a long time Gibson fan I am underwhelmed by any attempt to film the books as the economics are against it. Do it on the cheap and it’s crap, like The Peripheral or spend enough to make it good, like Dredd and you lose money because there aren’t enough fans to make it a financial success.
It’s especially a problem with Gibson as he himself says the plot is just an armature for the prose, which of course is lost immediately. It’s like trying to film a poem. I’d like to see Gibson done in the style of The Spirits Within which I think would suit the material better.
What is it they call them on Australian TV — the ginger and whinger? I mean really who cares? Does it really warrant a post here that two of the most ridiculous, hypocritical people in the British upper crust are moving back? The less I hear about them the better, though I do hear her $60 a jar of jam is pretty tasty.
Aren’t they going to enter the EU via Morocco or Libya, and then paddle a dinghy across the Channel, according to the current protocol for legitimate immigration?
There are two themes dominating the “mainstream media” (the BBC, Sky News, Channel Four – and so on) in Britain – one is the worship of “Andy” Burnham (every word that comes out of this person’s mouth is considered sacred – and he is presented as having wonderful intentions, and in the process of solving all problems) – and the other theme is “Meghan and Harry”.
The position of the United Kingdom is so obviously without hope, that one might as well stop worrying about it – and laugh.
One of the few silver linings of recent current affairs has been that they obscured the dealings of this pair. But it is late August – “silly season” – and there is a certain media exhaustion in writing about migrants crossing the English Channel, plagiarism in Cambridge, slow economic growth, Andy Burnham going on about “neoliberalism” and so on. As a result, this is a gift: a perfect late-summer story. The sort of slop that appears in the Daily Mail and gets on daytime current affairs TV will be boosted.
These two will need tax advice, having been in the US for a while and with US-sourced income.
I’m seeing various rumbles suggesting that they are returning to UK ahead of some rather-pointed questions about the terms of his US visa. Anyone know more?
@llamas I’m seeing various rumbles suggesting that they are returning to UK ahead of some rather-pointed questions about the terms of his US visa. Anyone know more?
On a visa application you are asked about drug use which presumably he denied, despite the fact that he has publicly discussed it. Lying on a form signed with lots of warnings about fraud on it is it pretty serious offence. Although they can’t deny him a visa, being married to a US Citizen, they could potentially put him in jail for fraud. But, FWIW, I think that is unlikely. There have been lots of FOIA requests for his form but the government seems to be very resistant to it (though TBH I agree with them on this — forms you have to fill in with personal information should not be subject to the curious snooping of FOIA requests.)
I doubt their decision is much to do with this. If Harry wasn’t so dumb I’d attribute it to him setting himself up better for a divorce from the crazy lady, but I think it is more likely her who thinks there is more money to be made by being in Britain, and probably more ability to elevate her kids’ status.
However, it troubles me a great deal that I both know all of this and have evidently thought about it. These two losers should not occupy a single moment of any serious person’s thoughts. Dukes and Duchesses, princes and princesses? What an anachronism the whole thing is. FFS, is this the Victorian age?
Stonyground – if this was the Victorian Age we would be better at everything, including surviving. But that is true of all Western nations – there is no Western nation that is not worse governed, vastly worse governed, now than it was in 1900. Technology is vastly more advanced – that has enabled the system to stagger on, even have much higher living standards than in 1900 – but a totally insane system can not be propped up for ever by high tech.
Western nations can not fund their Welfare States, have declining farming and industry, and are not even having babies to replace their national populations – and the groups that are having babies are filled with hatred for the West. And there is zero chance that anything is going to be done to turn this around in the United Kingdom – the situation is without hope, so we might as well watch the “Meghan and Harry” show.
Johnathan Pearce – Prime Minister Burnham claims to be following Catholic Social Teaching, he is NOT – no one should hold their breath waiting for him to condemn abortion, homosexual acts or “feminism” (of course there are a lot of important people in the Vatican who love all these things – but that is a conversation for another day), what he is, partly, doing is following the ECONOMIC teaching – specifically the first paragraph of Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical of 1891 – written under the influence of Cardinal Manning (Leo XIII did not leave the Vatican and depended on other people for his knowledge of the outside world).
According to the first paragraph of the 1891 Encyclical what Mr Burnham would call “neo liberalism” had been responsible for driving most people into terrible poverty (and for a supposed increase in “moral depravity”), and “working class solidarity” (i.e. government backed Collective Bargaining – under such things as the British Act of 1875, the Disraeli Act which Cardinal Manning had supported) was a way of improving living standards.
The problem with all these claims is that they are FALSE – just as establishment claims about Covid, that it emerged naturally, that there were no effective Early Treatments, and that the “vaccines” were “safe and effective” are false – people who come out with all these establishment claims in 2026 are behaving badly, very badly indeed (President Trump is not guilty of making the first two false claims – but he is guilty of making the third false claim).
It is just not true that living standards had declined in 1891 – indeed they were higher than they had ever been, much higher. As for a massive increase in “moral depravity” – anyone who claims that the society of 1891 was more morally depraved than that of 1791 or 1491 (or whenever) is (or was) so wrong that they are totally cut off from reality. Moral conduct had, generally, greatly improved – improved.
As for government backed Collective Bargaining (legalizing obstruction, “picket lines” and other paramilitary tactics) – this is an engine for creating UNEMPLOYMENT.
In short the first paragraph of the Encyclical of 1891 upon which the economic teaching (economic – not “social teaching”) of the Catholic Church is based, is not just wrong – it is the reverse-of-the-truth.
Ironically the 1891 Encyclical goes on to condemn (yes condemn – in the strongest possible terms) socialism – but the damage is done in the, utterly false, first paragraph. On that first paragraph a mountain of error has been built.
Johnathan, Those two weren’t just in the US, they were in CALIFORNIA. The CA Tax Board has a reputation for nasty tenacity. The only worse US jurisdiction is New York City.
I am a huge Gibson fan and the trailer is… underwhelming.
Problem is, I think, is that there’s no such thing as a “casual” Gibson fan. The prose-style sort of selects out of that.
I mean, obvious joke is obvious, but unless the opening shot looks like BBC2 circa 3am in 1981 with snowy analogue-style black and white dots, then we’re all going to immediately lose our shit over it.
(The Peripheral was *fine*, as TV adaptations go, but it wasn’t the books)
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa
I admit it, I LOL’ed
Molly! A ghost from the past!
I assume you have seen the trailer?
They better not fuck it up 🙁
Without a doubt, the tabloid press are out celebrating Megs & Harry coming back to Britain, because we can safely anticipate a toe-curling festival of naffness and cringe.
It’s going to be an absolute hoot
We in the USA are of course bereft.
Our long national nightmare finally comes to an end.
Your national nightmare, dear Britain, resumes.
Bloody hell! It’s bad enough with all the illegal economic migrants and then this? The plagues of Egypt are looking like a minor inconvenience in comparison.
I still say it’s a Shakespearean Tragedy: “The Tragedy of Prince Harry, Or, The Failure to Tame the Shrew.”
Molly,
As a long time Gibson fan I am underwhelmed by any attempt to film the books as the economics are against it. Do it on the cheap and it’s crap, like The Peripheral or spend enough to make it good, like Dredd and you lose money because there aren’t enough fans to make it a financial success.
It’s especially a problem with Gibson as he himself says the plot is just an armature for the prose, which of course is lost immediately. It’s like trying to film a poem. I’d like to see Gibson done in the style of The Spirits Within which I think would suit the material better.
What is it they call them on Australian TV — the ginger and whinger? I mean really who cares? Does it really warrant a post here that two of the most ridiculous, hypocritical people in the British upper crust are moving back? The less I hear about them the better, though I do hear her $60 a jar of jam is pretty tasty.
Aren’t they going to enter the EU via Morocco or Libya, and then paddle a dinghy across the Channel, according to the current protocol for legitimate immigration?
There are two themes dominating the “mainstream media” (the BBC, Sky News, Channel Four – and so on) in Britain – one is the worship of “Andy” Burnham (every word that comes out of this person’s mouth is considered sacred – and he is presented as having wonderful intentions, and in the process of solving all problems) – and the other theme is “Meghan and Harry”.
The position of the United Kingdom is so obviously without hope, that one might as well stop worrying about it – and laugh.
Will the ‘useful idiots’ decry the Megs & Harry pile on in the press? No, I suspect not – they are not part of the victim class.
One of the few silver linings of recent current affairs has been that they obscured the dealings of this pair. But it is late August – “silly season” – and there is a certain media exhaustion in writing about migrants crossing the English Channel, plagiarism in Cambridge, slow economic growth, Andy Burnham going on about “neoliberalism” and so on. As a result, this is a gift: a perfect late-summer story. The sort of slop that appears in the Daily Mail and gets on daytime current affairs TV will be boosted.
These two will need tax advice, having been in the US for a while and with US-sourced income.
Via Instapundit.
I’m seeing various rumbles suggesting that they are returning to UK ahead of some rather-pointed questions about the terms of his US visa. Anyone know more?
llater,
llamas
@llamas
I’m seeing various rumbles suggesting that they are returning to UK ahead of some rather-pointed questions about the terms of his US visa. Anyone know more?
On a visa application you are asked about drug use which presumably he denied, despite the fact that he has publicly discussed it. Lying on a form signed with lots of warnings about fraud on it is it pretty serious offence. Although they can’t deny him a visa, being married to a US Citizen, they could potentially put him in jail for fraud. But, FWIW, I think that is unlikely. There have been lots of FOIA requests for his form but the government seems to be very resistant to it (though TBH I agree with them on this — forms you have to fill in with personal information should not be subject to the curious snooping of FOIA requests.)
I doubt their decision is much to do with this. If Harry wasn’t so dumb I’d attribute it to him setting himself up better for a divorce from the crazy lady, but I think it is more likely her who thinks there is more money to be made by being in Britain, and probably more ability to elevate her kids’ status.
However, it troubles me a great deal that I both know all of this and have evidently thought about it. These two losers should not occupy a single moment of any serious person’s thoughts. Dukes and Duchesses, princes and princesses? What an anachronism the whole thing is. FFS, is this the Victorian age?
BTW, correction, signing a knowingly, materially, false form is perjury not fraud and it theoretically can carry a penalty of 10 years in jail.
“FFS, is this the Victorian age?”
If it was we might be a bit better at building new railway lines.
Stonyground – if this was the Victorian Age we would be better at everything, including surviving. But that is true of all Western nations – there is no Western nation that is not worse governed, vastly worse governed, now than it was in 1900. Technology is vastly more advanced – that has enabled the system to stagger on, even have much higher living standards than in 1900 – but a totally insane system can not be propped up for ever by high tech.
Western nations can not fund their Welfare States, have declining farming and industry, and are not even having babies to replace their national populations – and the groups that are having babies are filled with hatred for the West. And there is zero chance that anything is going to be done to turn this around in the United Kingdom – the situation is without hope, so we might as well watch the “Meghan and Harry” show.
Johnathan Pearce – Prime Minister Burnham claims to be following Catholic Social Teaching, he is NOT – no one should hold their breath waiting for him to condemn abortion, homosexual acts or “feminism” (of course there are a lot of important people in the Vatican who love all these things – but that is a conversation for another day), what he is, partly, doing is following the ECONOMIC teaching – specifically the first paragraph of Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical of 1891 – written under the influence of Cardinal Manning (Leo XIII did not leave the Vatican and depended on other people for his knowledge of the outside world).
According to the first paragraph of the 1891 Encyclical what Mr Burnham would call “neo liberalism” had been responsible for driving most people into terrible poverty (and for a supposed increase in “moral depravity”), and “working class solidarity” (i.e. government backed Collective Bargaining – under such things as the British Act of 1875, the Disraeli Act which Cardinal Manning had supported) was a way of improving living standards.
The problem with all these claims is that they are FALSE – just as establishment claims about Covid, that it emerged naturally, that there were no effective Early Treatments, and that the “vaccines” were “safe and effective” are false – people who come out with all these establishment claims in 2026 are behaving badly, very badly indeed (President Trump is not guilty of making the first two false claims – but he is guilty of making the third false claim).
It is just not true that living standards had declined in 1891 – indeed they were higher than they had ever been, much higher. As for a massive increase in “moral depravity” – anyone who claims that the society of 1891 was more morally depraved than that of 1791 or 1491 (or whenever) is (or was) so wrong that they are totally cut off from reality. Moral conduct had, generally, greatly improved – improved.
As for government backed Collective Bargaining (legalizing obstruction, “picket lines” and other paramilitary tactics) – this is an engine for creating UNEMPLOYMENT.
In short the first paragraph of the Encyclical of 1891 upon which the economic teaching (economic – not “social teaching”) of the Catholic Church is based, is not just wrong – it is the reverse-of-the-truth.
Ironically the 1891 Encyclical goes on to condemn (yes condemn – in the strongest possible terms) socialism – but the damage is done in the, utterly false, first paragraph. On that first paragraph a mountain of error has been built.
Johnathan, Those two weren’t just in the US, they were in CALIFORNIA. The CA Tax Board has a reputation for nasty tenacity. The only worse US jurisdiction is New York City.
I am a huge Gibson fan and the trailer is… underwhelming.
Problem is, I think, is that there’s no such thing as a “casual” Gibson fan. The prose-style sort of selects out of that.
I mean, obvious joke is obvious, but unless the opening shot looks like BBC2 circa 3am in 1981 with snowy analogue-style black and white dots, then we’re all going to immediately lose our shit over it.
(The Peripheral was *fine*, as TV adaptations go, but it wasn’t the books)
Neon, the opening shot will be a particular very bright blue…
Fred, more likely:
“The sky above the port was the colour of a television home screen, several boxes labelled ‘your next watch'”
I understand they’ve already arranged for their morning Daily Mail newspaper to be delivered.
Fred the Forth – when dealing with the governance of California and New York, especially New York City, I think we need Dante.
Dante was good at describing the various circles of Hell.