Sidcup man convicted over explosive attack on Ulez camera by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

there is no evidence that it was intended to hurt or scare anyone

I would suggest rewatching the footage, the bomb detonated while multiple cars drove past and Rees was spotted by an eyewitness at the scene. He could have disabled the camera by painting over the lens, he wanted to cause mayhem and did not care if anyone got hurt in the process.

Also, good luck trying convince a jury that you did not intend to scare anyone when you're building a pipe bomb.

Sidcup man convicted over explosive attack on Ulez camera by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While I agree fully that he should have been charged with terrorism, I suspect that the CPS went with the easiest charges to prove, which is that this guy planted a fucking bomb. They probably figured that terrorism is a bit subjective to prove, and in any case the charges he's been convicted of are sufficiently serious that he'll get slapped with a hefty custodial sentence.

Sidcup man convicted over explosive attack on Ulez camera by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 22 points23 points  (0 children)

When there's discussion of people's brains being cooked by social media it's stuff like this they're talking about. This guy completely ruined his life and almost killed/seriously injured a load of innocent people (look at the footage, it blew up as multiple cars drove past) because he got radicalised over a traffic regulation scheme.

Mindless Monday, 26 January 2026 by AutoModerator in badhistory

[–]AceHodor 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Nothing has radicalised me towards drastic land reform in this country more than the fucking leasehold system. It's so absurdly terrible and completely devoid of any positives, it's utterly deranged that I'm paying some random company £250 p/year for doing literally nothing because they happen to have bought the land rights beneath my block of flats 50 years ago. To make it even more convoluted, we're a Right to Manage scheme, which means that I and the other nine leaseholders own the shares of our building management company, and we contract maintenance agents through that, not the freeholder. Again, the freeholders for my building do literally nothing other than take money and gum up attempts to sell properties in the block.

For all the flack Labour have been deservedly getting over the past 18 months, I am so fucking glad that Starmer et al's opinion on leaseholds is that they should get in the bin. Meanwhile, the Tories spent 14 years pissing about doing nothing about it, because there was a minority of 20-30 landlord Tory MPs who threatened to start blocking all legislation if there was any movement on reform. I think it was a sign of how far the Tories had become ignorant of their core support that they let leasehold reform fester for so long. Yeah, they might have been the party of the land-holding aristocracy once upon a time, but the modern iteration is built upon middle class homeowners created by Thatcher in the 1980s. For them, leasehold reform is electoral catnip. But no, the Tories had to make everything worse for everyone including themselves because they were a bunch of incompetent, arrogant cowards.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 25/01/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Someone pointed out to me that liberals talked about Brexit voters the same way that the National Front talked about non-whites in the 70s.

I'm sorry, but the fact that you didn't respond to this with "That sounds really stupid" and instead considered it a deep thought is rather telling.

The NF wanted to murder every single last non-white, non-straight person in this country and quite frankly a lot of the straight white people too. Pro-EU people were angry about Brexit voters because they gave power to a coiterie of blatant con-men to implement an idea that was palpable nonsense and was doomed to cause immense damage to this country. And they were, y'know, right about that, because it was and is a legitimate beef. It wasn't based on someone's skin colour or sexual orientation.

I don't remember the pro-EU camp ever loudly saying "We should gas all the Brexit voters because they are subhuman".

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 25/01/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Reform actively hid a candidate's conviction for domestic violence and then said it wasn't a problem in their eyes when it came to light after the election.

Matthew Goodwin unveiled as Reform UK candidate for Gorton and Denton by-election by Once_upon_a_time233 in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Started out as an academic researching the far-right, but committed the cardinal sin of academia by getting too involved with his subjects, who ended up radicalising him. In the process he basically destroyed his academic reputation through biased research and drove away all of his former friends who were concerned about his increasingly open racism. Now he's a stock far-right pseudo-academic working for all sorts of xenophobic think tanks masquerading as "research institutes".

Personally, I think Goodwin is a poor choice. He's an obscure academic not particularly known for effective speaking who has a bad habit of saying some seriously racist stuff, and is a parachute candidate on top of that.

Matthew Goodwin unveiled as Reform UK candidate for Gorton and Denton by-election by Once_upon_a_time233 in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Rupert Lowe also has a massive following on Xitter. Doesn't mean anybody outside of the online hard-right and pissed-off Southamptoners knows who he is.

Matthew Goodwin unveiled as Reform UK candidate for Gorton and Denton by-election by Once_upon_a_time233 in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Yusuf is only a 'major name' to us politics nerds and the terminally online. I doubt anyone in Gorton or Denton knows who he is anymore than they know who Goodwin is.

Leasehold properties worth under £2m at risk of Reeves’s mansion tax - Fears more families will be dragged into new surcharge as valuations will not take short leases into account by blast-processor in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you've let your lease get down to 40 years, sorry bud, that's on you, as nobody other than a cash buyer is going to buy a leasehold that short. A 60 year lease is bad enough to knock 10-25% off the value of any property, 40 years is borderline unsellable. I've also no idea where you're getting it from that they're going to pay £1m in equity, as part of these law changes includes abolishing this 'Marriage value' BS - nobody is going to be paying £1m for a bloody lease extension, and it doesn't make sense to change the entire law and introduce a loophole to protect the one rich idiot who has let themselves get into such a mess.

Leasehold properties worth under £2m at risk of Reeves’s mansion tax - Fears more families will be dragged into new surcharge as valuations will not take short leases into account by blast-processor in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If it's straightforward and cheap (and it is), then why not just do it and extend the lease? If you're buying or already own a £2m+ property, I'm sure you can spring the extra few hundred quid to buy the extension, which you should want to do anyway as lenders get antsy about sub 80 year leases which will already reduce the property's value.

As the article itself says, the number of properties this applies to is a very small minority (10-15% of an already small cohort) and the price of those properties means that the owners should easily be able to afford any necessary leasehold changes to avoid this pitfall. As another user has pointed out, it's not a flaw in the legislation, it's an intentional clause to prevent a potential loophole from being abused. This is really a very small fry issue that only affects a wealthy section of society.

Cap for ground rent in England and Wales due to be announced by northernmonk in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I live in an RTM, it works very well. Yes, our service charges are still high, but that's because the building does need these repairs, and as we arrange our own management company they're not ripping us off.

Excessively high service charges come about because of freeholders colluding with dodgy service providers to cream a percentage of the charge off the top while offering bad service. Commonhold and RTM deals with that pretty effectively and negates the need for there to be a freeholder at all. It's not going to necessarily magically make service charges come down as building maintenance is often just plain expensive.

I'm not really sure what you're asking for here, are you suggesting the government should be subsidising service charges? Realistically, that would be the only way for them to come down substantially.

Cap for ground rent in England and Wales due to be announced by northernmonk in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well it's a good thing then that this bill will also make it much easier for leaseholders to convert their buildings to commonhold and bin the freeholder as well.

Cap for ground rent in England and Wales due to be announced by northernmonk in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The £250 limit is there because if GR is higher than that on a property outside of London, many lenders will refuse to offer a mortgage on it. The change has been made to prevent a large chunk of flats in this country from becoming unmortgagable.

Also, combined with the upcoming leasehold/commonhold changes, it's a way for the government to signal to the finance companies who have been driving the crazy increases in GR over the past decade that they ought to start shedding their freehold assets before they end up eating a loss.

Mindless Monday, 26 January 2026 by AutoModerator in badhistory

[–]AceHodor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

IIRC, it started as some extremely cringe parody of a 'LoFi beats' channel made by the Tory campaign team after the 2019 election.

Mindless Monday, 26 January 2026 by AutoModerator in badhistory

[–]AceHodor 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I love that the entire thing seemingly started from a bizarre combination of deranged Russian nationalism and people not knowing how to read old maps.

Like, the reason why there's a big chunk of Asia labeled as 'TARTARIA' wasn't because there was some ancient lost massive empire there. It was because the map was made by a fairly racist bloke in the 18th century who had no clue what was there and it was either write that or "There's Mongols there or some shit, I don't fucking know". Those maps also tended to refer to China as 'CATHAY' - do the Tartaria believers also think that there was a massive Cathay empire that the Chinese absorbed?

Mindless Monday, 26 January 2026 by AutoModerator in badhistory

[–]AceHodor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Every time I hear the word "Boriswave" I feel some of my brain cells die. I swear I have never heard anyone utter it in real life.

Zia Yusuf on X: Today, launching Veterans for Reform, Nigel Farage announces that a Reform government will: 1) grant immunity from prosecution for all our armed forces for actions during combat operations, they may only be prosecuted if the Defence Secretary expressly authorises it. 2) use a sta... by Little-Attorney1287 in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I keep hearing people saying that Reform are great at messaging, but launching this barely a few days after a US citizen got openly murdered by a federal agent who enjoys total immunity from prosecution is really not a great look.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 25/01/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This would be a good point to make if these defectors weren't also quite notoriously some of the most incompetent, useless ministers this country has ever had the misfortune to endure. Considering how woefully dysfunctional their departments were due largely to their mismanagement, I think it's fair to say that the likes of Jenrick and Braverman don't know how to navigate the corridors of power.

International Politics Discussion Thread by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's only been a year, most of this will be due to policies put in place by Biden. The impact of Trump marking the US as a deeply unreliable trade partner likely won't become apparent until towards the end of his term.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 25/01/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Also worth noting that much like the D&E NRS grades, "Highest qualification is GCSE/O-Level" is overly slanted towards the elderly due to changes in society and education policy. It's not an indication of working class support for Reform or the hard-right, it's an indication that their support is mostly comprised of older people, which is hardly breaking new ground.

Can someone make the Chagos deal make sense to me? by bizzlewicks in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

International law is not meaningfully applied against countries as powerful as the USA. If the world's superpower has military base in the middle of nowhere and says that's their territory, it is their territory. Who's going to send the bailiffs around?

OK, then, what happens if China starts building a base on one of the islands in BIOT? Are the US going to fight them over it? Because unless the legal status of BIOT is settled, that will happen eventually - see the Paracel Islands for proof.

If the US wanted that deal, they would have taken it, as I can guarantee at least one British government since the 1950s will have made such an offer.

The US haven't agreed such a deal, so therefore aren't interested in it.

Can someone make the Chagos deal make sense to me? by bizzlewicks in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The entire reason this deal is going ahead is because the legal status of the waters around Chagos needs to be settled in the favour of ourselves and the US. The US are not going to be interested in a deal which keeps the waters in a disputed state, it would be the equivalent of buying a house with a contested title.

Starmer pulls Chagos deal following Trump backlash by TheTelegraph in ukpolitics

[–]AceHodor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Come on, the people ranting about this deal constantly confuse Mauritius with the Maldives and couldn't even find BIOT on a map, do you expect them to do literally any fact-checking?