What Do You Think Today?

[I'm Murrin]

There has been a furore about the questionable age of the 'children' seen debouching from the coaches bringing asylum granted refugees to the UK. Much was made of the government's decision to allow 300 or so children immediate entry, and it was with some surprise that people saw on their TVs the chosen children to be adolescent males certainly in their later teens.

I have some sympathy with this. If the camps in Calais are awash with children at risk, as we are told, then certainly they must be given the sanctuary they need - but where are they? Where are the toddlers, the 10, 11 and 12 year olds clearly identifiable as children in the way that most of us accept the use of the word. Why are the semi-adult individuals we see being given preference as the first selected to come. It was disingenuous to use the term 'children' to create a public perception that would foster acceptance of what would clearly be a contentious policy when/if the reality were unveiled. As to the problem of ascertaining the age status of those who are given places on the coaches, perhaps i should be drafted in to help. I have to make that judgement in the shop 100 times a day under threat of legal punishment if I get it wrong, and can absolutely guarantee that no-one who was not of 'minor' status would get on.

(In case my views on the UK's meeting it's obligations in respect of providing asylum to refugees from war-torn Syria are misunderstood, can I state unequivocally that I am 100% behind us meeting our commitments in this regard - but believe equally that it should be done in an open and straightforward manner and not hidden behind smoke and mirrors tactics that fool no-one.)

Sad truth: The young boys die and the girls get stolen.

[Vraith]

Sad truth: The young boys die and the girls get stolen.

That's part of it. Other part is that apparently the women and children stay in camps in nearby countries---to avoid dying and other harm, and because it is almost impossible to travel in whole family groups. IIRC, the camps in bordering countries are 3/4 or more women and children.

[peter]

That is terrible and just plain not acceptable.

[I'm Murrin]

Yeah. They send the ones that have a better chance of surviving the trip. That's why it's mostly older teenage boys.

[peter]

I heard the idea mooted that we should maybe base our selection process on those to be granted refugee/asylum status from camps in the region itself: maybe this would help to ease this tragic situation and also discourage the westward flow of migrants?

[peter]

I'm an OWM - that's an old white male: apparently I'm responsible for Brexit, Donald Trump and the bulk of everything else that's wrong in the world today. Oh well, I guess somebody has to be so it might just as well be me as anyone else (and I'm a past master at living with guilt ).

[StevieG]

Damn you, OWM

[Avatar]

Guilt is over-rated.

--A

[peter]

Tell me about it!

[deer of the dawn]

Today I am thinking that my remark about the singularity beginning here at the Watch was noticed by said AI entities, because I can no longer post in that thread; the 406 thread in Announcements/Suggestions. When I try to, I get the 406 error.

[Avatar]

The 406 is not random. You're causing it. Somehow.

--A

[peter]

It's caused by inclusion of any/some non alphabetical components in a post. A GB pound sign will cause it on my device - you can sometimes rescue the post by back tracking to the message box and screening out the offending symbol.

As to AI entities, yes - make no mistake......covetous eyes and cold intelligences watch us as we post (and I don't mean Hashi)

[Avatar]

*shudders*

--A

[sgt.null]

I'm an OWM - that's an old white male: apparently I'm responsible for Brexit, Donald Trump and the bulk of everything else that's wrong in the world today. Oh well, I guess somebody has to be so it might just as well be me as anyone else (and I'm a past master at living with guilt ).

I keep getting blamed for Trump. I did not vote for him and kept warning people that he was a loon. I kept telling people Hilary was a horrible candidate. and I warned that if she lost her followers would lose their hold on reality.

none of this was my fault!

[peter]

[Peter aside; "Methinks Sarge, he doth protest too much!" ]

[Vraith]

The 406 is not random. You're causing it. Somehow.

--A

The things that can cause it seem to have multiplied vastly out there. Almost everything I quote by copy/paste seems to have SOME fuckity character indiscernable by ordinary eyes. I just don't bother to try anymore.
I paste it, then retype it, then delete the original text. [[[heh...so more single sentence quotes from me now, less whole interesting paragraphs...so maybe a good thing for the readers]]].


And it's not fair to blame OWM---old white women voted for him, too.

It's like blaming Obama and the EPA for the loss of coal jobs. Coal jobs started crashing LITERALLY DECADES before the EPA even existed...before Obama was BORN...maybe before Obama's FATHER was born. [[And coal production grew for most of that time...]]
It's STILL higher than the golden years, by over 50%...it isn't the EPA or any president's fault that they can dig it up with 80% fewer workers.

[Avatar]

It's usually comma's or quotation marks.

--A

[peter]

The UK have introduced a plastic five pound note into the currency to replace the old paper one that is becoming increasingly dog-eared as time passes. More durable it will, they say last longer and be harder to forge.The vegan brigade are however up in arms because they say the use of tallow in its production is against their ethical position. Don't fret too much I say - you will in short order exchange it for the leather shoes, belts and buckles that are an additional byproduct of the meat we eat, and which in the main remain uneschewed.

[Avatar]

Surprised it's taken this long...the antipodeans have been using plastic notes for years.

Tell the vegans they can send me all their unwanted fivers for disposal...

--A

[peter]

Another odd feature that I can't quite understand is that in the clear portion of the note there is a small etched pound sign (I believe) that is visible only when you hold the note up to light. Apparently in fifty or so of the millions produced, there has been added a small face (of whose I know not) next to the sign. These notes are apparently worth their weight in gold .......errr.........no, loads more than that - thousands - to collectors. But why would the Mint do this. In years gone by, some notes or coins were produced with accidental flaws that gave them value, but this is the first time I've heard of what must be a deliberate anomaly being introduced. Why would they do this? If it's a mere bit of whimsy isn't it sending out the wrong signals. Currency isn't a joke - it's a serious thing and tampering or defacing it used to carry strict penalties. Should the Mint themselves engage in frivolous games in its production that for members of the public would have been deemed crimes?


(nb. I don't actually think this - I couldn't care less; they can produce it with the queen wearing Groucho Marx glasses and a moustache for all it is to me, but I can see that some people might think along these lines and they might have a point.)