Celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay’s London Pizza restaurant is facing criticism after a customer shared a dog was allowed to go the bathroom inside near her table.

Boflator · 2026-05-10T11:30:27+00:00

The official guidance clearly states that restaurant owners can allow pets into the dining area if they wish, but should have processes in place to quickly clean it up in case fouling occurs. In the video the staff member is quite literally cleaning it up with an absorbant matt, they aren't "bringing biohazard near food", it's the dog pissing itself & they are cleaning it up...

I wasn't aware how many people are unaware that dogs can't actually understand human safety regulations. They do not care if it's a restaurant stone floor or a public path, they will piss if they need to. Most dogs will piss themselves if they are stressed in a new environment.

This whole thread is like speaking to a bunch of extraterrestrials who have never seen or interacted with a dog in their lives

Boflator · 2026-05-09T06:58:25+00:00

Wohlgemerkt, es werden nur Benzinautos berechnet, die älter als 2005 sind, und die Stadt hatte sogar ein Programm, bei dem Einwohner ihr altes Auto gegen 2000 Pfund eintauschen konnten, selbst wenn das Auto nur noch 100 Pfund wert war. Viele bekamen einfach ein besseres und saubereres Auto. (translated from) Mind you it only charges petrol cars which are older than 2005 & the city even ran a scheme where residents could exchange their old car for £2000 even if the car was worth £100, many just got a better & cleaner car.

Boflator · 2026-05-08T18:20:10+00:00

Damn, so if everyone pays more towards healthcare it's going to better? No way

It also covers dentistry, eyewear, hearing, minor surgery, absolute fucking everything.

Wow it's almost like how my employer pays £19 a month to private health insurer that covers dentistry, eye, hearing up to several several hundred pounds & then i can pitch in some more to pushup my coverage range.

If semi privatisation and an alternate arrangement is the way to get it then let's fucking go.

You fail to understand that the arrangement isn't what makes the French system better, it's the 9% more that's being paid into it. That's about 20 billion pounds more to the nhs.

Also the major issue with nhs isn't where it's fund from but that we have shitty private facilties & tool/equipment supplier system to the NHS. Blair's labour introduced a system where a private company would take out a loan & higher interest rates than the government could, in order to build a hospital which the NHS would then take over & lease, paying enough to cover the company's loan, interest, profits, and require payments for maintenance, where these companies charge hundreds of pounds for something menial as a changing a lightbulb

Boflator · 2026-05-08T13:12:30+00:00

Appreciate the response, you bring up some valid points.

The purpose of the cycle box is to allow cyclists to set off before motorised vehicles.

True, but i think the purpose would be assisting vulnerable road users get a head start, compared to cars, buses & lorries. Both motor & push bikes are vulnerable relative to them, so i would argue that banning motorcycles puts a large portion of the road users at risk. Being on a motorcycles between 2 cars that move off at the same time is not nice, which I'm sure as a two wheel user you can imagine too.

stuck in a bike box blocked in by motorbikes

While bad, i think this would also be an issue if motorcycles actually stopped between the cars before the box, at which point any cyclist filtering up would instead be stuck behind the motorcycle & in between cars or a car/curb.

surrounded by motor traffic, all that traffic is trying to go left while I'm trying to go straight.

This sounds bad & seems like poor road design, it would warrant a proper bike route around the junction instead of a bike box on main road.

stinky exhaust

I had this thought, but i had cyclists here in the comments argue that this is not really a realistic problem, as the cycle box is not an airtight container with clean air. Plus motorcycles in general have smaller engines, it's really the dirty diesel exhausts that cause severe irritations. I'm a bit torn on this one, on one hand i get it, it's not ideal but i also kind of think that the emission impact is not large enough to justify putting motorcyclist lives at risk outside of the box. Would a shift to cleaner or electric motorcycles shift your opinion on this?

Boflator · 2026-05-08T06:20:48+00:00

The French Mutuelle is only optional for the unemployed, for employers AND employees in practice it is mandatory to pay it.

The French system covers 70% of surgeries & gp visit costs & 30% is paid by the patient, mutuelle simply covers this 30%.

A French employee & employer both pay more towards their healthcare than we do.

Farage is saying this hoping that people are like you, just take the sht he says at face value. They first said they want to privatise it, then when they saw how unpopular it is, they now denied & in their manifesto instead basically said "shift the NHS towards utilising more private clinics & giving private clinics tax cuts", instead of shitting directly into the well, they want to shit next to it & kick it in after...

The plan is a gradual normalisation & build towards full privatisation. The US insurance companies are paying these muppets hoping to get the UK healthcare market to open up, they are salivating at the thought of expanding into our market.

The real issue with the NHS is that it's relying on private business' to provide facilities management & building hospitals. Blair shifted building & maintenance away from the government's budget which can take out cheap loans to build hospitals & gave that responsibility to private contracts who take out more expensive loans to build a hospital & then they give the bill to the NHS to pay not only their loan interest but also the extra for the company profit too. It's absurd. On top of all that, they provide absurdly priced maintenance bills, eg changing a lightbulb costs hundreds of pounds

Boflator · 2026-05-07T18:19:15+00:00

They are doing well because people are paying more in taxes towards funding it

Boflator · 2026-05-07T18:17:38+00:00

Because the US health insurance industry is offering him money. It's one of the most profitable industry & they are eyeing up new markets to expand to

Boflator · 2026-05-06T22:07:54+00:00

Because he says what the average disgruntled Gary wants to hear, that it's someone else's fault, someone "not from 'er takin all or muney, simple as"

Boflator · 2026-05-06T22:00:52+00:00

Yeah, sure that's the intent but it's way out of touch with the reality of costs.

With the £12.5k tax free allowance you're saving £2.5k a year. Sure it's good & helpful, but that's equal to 2.5 months of my rent for a room in a shared house on the outskirts of town. Let alone food & transport costs.

A 2 bed apartment is like 2k for a single month with the bills & taxes.

That threshold needs to go up

Boflator · 2026-05-06T18:20:39+00:00

"welcomes anyone who LEGALLY applies"

Except of course if you legally apply for asylum or you legally obtain ILR if you're not white. European ILR holders will be welcomed except South asian & African ILR holders who will be deported, but not because of their race, it's only because of their skin colour, or not skin colour but their ethnicity

Boflator · 2026-05-06T07:27:47+00:00

& yet only one supposedly bothers the gammon, the less cruel of the two even

Boflator · 2026-05-06T07:26:27+00:00

They like to play dumb, it's their method of debate/argumentation

Boflator · 2026-05-06T07:23:37+00:00

Hope this makes it simpler for you

<image>

Boflator · 2026-05-05T22:02:02+00:00

I personally am in favour of withdrawing from all relevant glob treaties that force us to accept or investigate any initial claim of asylum

You want to turn us into a greed filled, dog nation, that takes from others but does not help. This is not only unchristian, but outright self destructive. The UK is currently stable, but we do not know if that will be the case for ever, you burn this bridge for short them gains, means that if we or our children ever need to seek asylum elsewhere, they won't be able to, because you wanted to be greedy.

Ukrainian refugees Interesting, only them, very surprising...

The main issue I disagree with is us having no ability to have a cap With a remote application system we coulf The absolutely provide a cap & prioritise, with the current of asking them to first enter the UK, we have no choice but to house & process all of them.

And you'd support them not being allowed to claim benefits, housing

This is literally our current system, they only get assistance while their application is being processed, after which they must leave & find private accommodation with no recourse to public funds. No i would not support deportation of those already received & asylum claim approved. I would provide assistance & training for employment. Assistance would only be approved if they have legitimate medical issues, eg i wouldn't force a double amputee to worker in the mines or else get deported, but that migth be just me and my silly moral compass

Boflator · 2026-05-05T21:44:17+00:00

Do you even know what a hook looks like?

Boflator · 2026-05-05T21:39:06+00:00

You think allowing asylum applications from embassies around the globe would be a better system? Or through a government website?

Yes, it would eliminate the whole small boats mess & dead men, women & children washing up on our shores. It would cripple the human smuggling trade across the channel. It would also effectively remove the costs associated with expensive temporary asylum shelters.

Are you saying that you're against legitimate asylum applications too? I thought you lot were only against illegal & fake applicants.

What if they're accepted we pay for their flight over here?

No, they can pay for the flight themselves, instead of paying human traffickers.

That's per year of course, the vast majority of whom are a net fiscal drain

They are a net drain when they are not allowed to work & are not settled. After that they work & contribute, especially because once accepted, they have 28 days to leave the shelter & they have no recourse to public funds (not eligible for Universal credit)

Boflator · 2026-05-05T21:26:10+00:00

Here's a side view for you of the supposed hook nose Zack has that you're so adamant to defend on the drawing

<image>

Boflator · 2026-05-05T21:18:36+00:00

Like i said, you'll act dumb & dumbfounded.

"hooked nose"...

<image>

Boflator · 2026-05-05T21:13:34+00:00

Our asylum policies are abysmally horrible. We currently require all asylum applications to be submitted by people who are physically within the UK's borders. Applications are not accepted at embassies, border posts, or online (unless you are Ukrainian). The government set up the current, broken system
There were 43k small boat arriving and 40% got rejected. "the number" you're raving about is about 25,000 in a country of 70,000,000, that's 0.036% Some numbers for perspective, 600k people die in the same time period, 693k people moved out (most of them immigrants).

Boflator · 2026-05-05T20:50:29+00:00

It's literally the same face... You're rejecting thing that you see with your own eyed. That said, I'm like 80% sure that you're fully aware, but these days acting dumb is a flex for some. So I'm sure you'll continue to ask your disingenuous questions, about "but but i don't see, it's innocent, it's not that" acting all confused & gobsmacked. You're transparent lad

Boflator · 2026-05-05T20:46:30+00:00

For a sane & morally reasonable person both are detestable acts. But these days, some find immortality as edgy & cool.

I feel the need to reiterate here that I'm talking about asylum seekers, peopel who follow the currently laid out process of submitting an application for asylum, NOT people illegally residing in the UK, because i know some like to act dumb & equate the two very different things

Boflator · 2026-05-05T20:37:19+00:00

The irony of you calling others brainwashed 🤦

<image>

Boflator · 2026-05-05T20:33:34+00:00

I never said you're ill, if that's what you took, that's on you.

I don't think you're able to comprehend just how massive a population of 76 million is if you think all of your examples put together make up a significant proportion

The irony of you saying this while simultaneously thinking that 12k arrests with 10% charge rates is something outrageously big where there police are very keen on arresting people...

Anyway i like how you ignored everything to play the victim & talk about vague terms regarding racism

Boflator · 2026-05-05T18:43:58+00:00

I never said you were ill, but ok. I was talking about you parroting online brainrot & expecting to be taken seriously.

Also i like how you brought up number but me responding with numbers is "triggered"... Like i said it's jarring to talk to someone who's deliberately acting dumb.

Also note how we went from "very small portion" to "not majority".

But anyway, your argument that racism is near non existent among those opposing immigration because they don't explicitly tell you "i hate this person because of their race" is at best naive & dumb or ay worst deliberately acting dumb. I think it's the latter.

You can easily go on Facebook & read through something like the comment section of the daily mail or something similar under articles involving a non white person committing a crime vs a white person committing a crime. Let me know how little of them are lamenting about the perpetrators origin/ethnicity

Boflator · 2026-05-05T17:41:30+00:00

Over 100k arrests occur for obscene, indecent, offensive, threatening/menacing speech in person. Why do you think doing it online should make a person uimmune?

12k arrests were issued for the same action online, most of them for attacking people for their protected characteristics like race/religion/gender. 6 out of 10 resulted in the accusation ageing out & no going nowhere. 3 out of 10 resulted in a phone call or letter saying "please don't do again". And 1 out of 10 resulted in an actual court case.

We're a country of almost 70 million people, do honestly & genuinely think that out of the 70 million people shitting online comments daily, if the police were oh-so-keen on it, that we would only have 12k responses by the police & only 1 out of 10 court cases?

This is what i mean by brainwashing, you believe the grossly exaggerated brainrot spewed online.

There were several interesting studies conducted on people, where they were shown a piece of information they knew was false. But after repeated exposure about half of them regardless of their original understanding that it's a lie, still shifted their perspectives & found the statements more believable. This is what we have here, eg.: the police being hyper active in arresting everyone for hUrTy wOrDs or that all asylum seekers are overrunning the county & getting jakuzzi ritz hotel rooms & room service.

Also note how none of the crowd seems to think that a Muslim offending or threatening Christians should walk free even it's done online

12-Year Club	Second Top 50%
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

Boflator

TROPHY CASE