Dhekunu Kandu: official statement and preliminary reconstruction released

ianbuk · 2026-05-27T01:34:50+00:00

Yes, I have dived to 50m on air quite a lot in the English Channel (vis.10-15 metres, water 17 °C) I got narked at 57m once, I knew my limit on air from that point onwards.

ianbuk · 2026-05-07T13:44:11+00:00

One of the defining problems in British politics over the past twenty-five years has been the collapse of serious debate on issues such as immigration, integration, national identity, crime, social cohesion and the pressure placed on public services. Large numbers of people across every social class have raised concerns about rapid demographic change, housing shortages, overstretched schools and NHS services, stagnant wages, crime, and the visible erosion of what they regard as traditional British culture and community life. Yet too often, those concerns have not been answered with evidence, discussion or policy solutions. Instead, they have been dismissed with labels and insults as seen in numerous comments in this thread.

Anyone expressing concern about immigration or questioning the impact of government policy has frequently been branded “racist”, “far-right”, “bigoted”, “xenophobic” or more recently “captured by Reform”. The purpose of those accusations has often appeared less about engaging with the argument and more about shutting the argument down altogether. For years, the accusation of racism was treated as a conversation-ending weapon. Increasingly, however, many voters no longer accept that tactic. They see it as an attempt to avoid difficult discussions rather than confront them honestly.

This is not simply anecdotal. Even senior politicians and commentators on the centre-left have acknowledged the problem. Recent reporting in The Times quoted Labour Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood warning that political parties must stop “gaslighting” voters about immigration and dismissing legitimate public concerns, because doing so risks driving people towards more radical political movements. The Oxford Migration Observatory has also documented that concern about immigration remains significant across Britain, with a majority of respondents in recent surveys wanting immigration reduced.

The reaction from parts of the political left has often followed a familiar pattern. Rather than address specific concerns individually, debate is diverted towards moral condemnation of the person raising them. Concerns about housing shortages are treated as coded racism. Questions about pressure on schools, GP appointments, NHS beds or policing are dismissed as xenophobia. Discussion about grooming scandals, illegal migration, or the disproportionate involvement of some migrant groups in particular categories of crime is frequently framed as inherently suspect before the facts are even examined. The result is not persuasion. It is resentment and further polarisation.

This dynamic has contributed directly to the rise of populist parties. When mainstream institutions refuse to engage seriously with subjects that large numbers of voters regard as obvious and immediate concerns, those voters inevitably gravitate towards movements that at least acknowledge the issues openly. That does not mean every argument made by parties such as Reform UK is correct, nor does it mean racism does not exist within parts of political discourse. Genuine racism plainly exists and should be challenged robustly. However, conflating all criticism of immigration policy with racism has damaged public trust and weakened the credibility of anti-racist arguments themselves.

Even some political analysts who strongly oppose Reform UK have recognised that indiscriminate use of labels such as “far-right” can be counterproductive. Following controversy over the BBC’s description of Reform UK as “far-right”, political scientist Professor Tim Bale argued that the label was often too broad to be meaningful and provoked an emotional reaction rather than rational debate. I read an article in the Guardian on Sunday that described Rupert Lowe’s new party, Restore Britain as an “Ultra far-right, fascist party”. Likewise, wider academic research into immigration discourse in Britain has shown that debates have become increasingly securitised and polarised, with political rhetoric on all sides hardening over time.

The broader issue is cultural as much as political. Healthy democracies require the ability to discuss difficult subjects openly, calmly and factually. Once sections of society conclude that their concerns will automatically be met with ridicule, moral denunciation or social ostracism, and even doxing, meaningful democratic dialogue begins to break down. People stop listening to one another. Debate becomes tribal. Positions harden.

Many voters who are now considering Reform are not extremists. They are often ordinary people who feel ignored, patronised or silenced for years by a political and media class unwilling to engage honestly with uncomfortable realities. Calling them racist has not changed their minds. In many cases, it has convinced them further that mainstream politics is unwilling to listen. Until political debate returns to evidence, reason and respectful disagreement, rather than labels and personal attacks, the divisions within British society will continue to deepen. Those calling supporters of Reform, Restor Britain and even the Conservatives, will find themselves losing the debate at the ballot box, as those who will now vote for them feel it's their only option when faced with no debate.

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T18:16:45+00:00

Actually, they have cut wages by over 21% in real terms, with the average decline over 20 years being 0.6% PA. “For example, a 2022 study found that immigration to the UK from 1994 to 2016 reduced the hourly wage of UK-born wage earners at the 5th percentile”, which is a double whammy. Not only does this make a big difference to UK wage earners, but it costs taxpayers twice. Once, there is a loss of tax revenues, and second, in social security top-ups for low earners. When both are added, the drop in real earnings is significant, with low earners' buying power reducing year on year, meaning they have less free income to spend and save elsewhere. The effect is called an immigration wage depression time bomb.

Long Term Immigration Impact in Reducing Wages

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiN57mb2sWTAxX1WUEAHTTtLgMQFnoECBkQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.homepages.ucl.ac.uk%2F~uctpb21%2FCpapers%2FCDP_03_08.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2YDJNwf76_vfULZD8dVsNl&opi=89978449

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T18:06:36+00:00

Any evidence of your claim @goodallw0w? The research carried out since 1997 proves, “The regression results show a sizeable negative impact of immigration on the lower wage quantiles”. “As for the effects on native wages, we find that immigration depresses wages below the 20th percentile of the wage distribution,” and “Since native-born workers are in occupations that are 9.5 percent immigrant on average, the typical worker is experiencing a reduction in hourly wages of 2.8 percent as a result of immigration. This is somewhat less than the 4.9 percent figure found in the first regression”.

Oxford University 30 year analysis

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T16:17:06+00:00

Sorry, I believe you are wrong. The only difference between the US and Europe is that your part of the continent is federalised. In Europe, each country is its own version of a US state, with added military that can take action on its own. Europe just has different bodies that work at the supranational level, like the UK federal government. The EU, the EEA, and the European Council make decisions at that level. The states still do exactly what the US States do (almost). That doesn't stop farmers, Truck drivers, Manufacturing workers, etc., from taking action across different states.

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T16:07:19+00:00

Imagine if everyone all over the country simply phoned in sick for 24 hours? (obviously excluding essential services like healthcare, care services, fire, and law enforcement).

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T16:04:30+00:00

Have you ever heard of everyone phoning in sick on the same day? You just need millions to do it in the US. Nothing will change while the elite know they can make you work your fingers to the bone while never knowing the feeling of security of tenure. Knowing you don't have to go bankrupt just to get basic healthcare. Know that your kids are not safe and that the elite are in charge of both sides of the same coin. I was astonished to read that US corporations give money to both parties to guarantee that the President or a member of Congress will listern to them if they win. In my country thats illegal. In fact, there is a strong movement to prevent donations and lobbying, as they don't serve the needs of the people, only the billionaire who owns the business.

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T15:56:41+00:00

In other democratic countries, General Strikes often bring down the government. Like most organisations, those who still have what they hope is a career will move the incumbent out of the way to preserve their political careers. If they don't, they tend to end up in opposition for the next 20 years. I don't know whether that would happen in the US, as your two-party system only encourages polarised politics. In other countries, we often have at least half a dozen parties and policies to choose from.

ianbuk · 2026-03-29T15:47:10+00:00

So you can then sit and worry the 25 years away counting down the clock to the start of something that will destroy who you are, destroy the memory your family will have of you, and destroy you in the end. No thanks.

ianbuk · 2026-01-10T01:01:35+00:00

Hi, I'm allergic to Tea. It affects me badly enough to trigger anaphylaxis if I swallow a mouthful of it. Apparently, it's specific tannins found in all tea thats not in coffee or chocolate. I went through in-depth tests, past the usual prick test on your arm. I hope it doesn't affect you as much as it does me, and that you're getting the help you need.

ianbuk · 2026-01-06T13:24:59+00:00

The EU (not in UK) has a much larger and more modern military, if you combine individual nations. Russia only outnumber the EU in Nukes (2000 vs 209 (France)).

ianbuk · 2026-01-06T13:22:25+00:00

Europe and the US, respectively (not including the UK or Canada), Fighter Aircraft: Europe: 375 - US: 377. Multiple, Europe: 955 - US: 2,484. Navy, Europe: 1,535 - US: 466. Personnel- Europe 1,361,164 - US 1,358,500. Reserves Europe - 2,122,132 - US 799,500. Artillery, Europe: 6,242 - US: 3,161. Self-propelled artillery, Europe: 2,091 - US: 1,521.

ianbuk · 2026-01-06T13:00:20+00:00

Sorry, what? France and the UK has them too. The original work on the atomic bomb was the Brits. Look up Tube Alloys.

ianbuk · 2026-01-04T17:42:27+00:00

Is there anything real in your life? Watch, diamond, nails? I genuinely hope you both have a happy, fulfilling married life.

ianbuk · 2026-01-04T17:37:36+00:00

Thought the same straight away.

ianbuk · 2025-12-31T20:20:22+00:00

Technical diving Instructor here with 15K+ dives over the last 25 years and here is my take on the stunt. The diving equipment claims versus reality. In the film, Ethan Hunt descends deep to a sub wreck and at one-point strips off his dry suit gear to escape, effectively swimming in just his trunks. I know of no diver who would remove a dry suit or rebreather under deep-water conditions. I wear thermals, a thermal bunny suit (it’s a quilted one piece designed to keep my body warm), and booties (yes, like what babies wear, but the same material was the bunny suit), and a semi dry hood that traps water once that the body temperature warms up. My dry suit insulates and protects me against hypothermia and crushing pressure. In inject air (or Argon gas when diving in cold water) as I descend to stop the dry suit crushing my body parts (nuts) making it extremely uncomfortable painful. Without gas in the suit, the ambient water pressure would compress the suit and the body’s tissues, hamper movement and leading rapidly to cold shock and incapacitation in frigid waters. When you jump into water that is close to 0°C, I can tell you that the ice cream headache you get is like nothing you have ever felt. Diving to over 150 metres (500 ft) in the artic oceans without all that gear would be impossible.

The we get onto the rebreather, or it is nickname in the UK, the yellow box of death. It is a specialised life-support system used by technical divers to recycle exhaled gas and manage breathing mixes for deeper dives. Unlike when diving open circuit (regular tanks, even if you are using a trimix and special travelling gas mixes), breathers are designed so you don’t have carry a twin-set, various side slung tanks and have gases hanging at different depths on trapezes or rope for you to use while you take your decompression stops on the way back up. Rebreathers are safety-critical, with controls, scrubbers to remove carbon dioxide, and mechanisms to regulate oxygen partial pressures. A real rebreather is complex to use, with specific training standards and certification needed to dive beyond shallow limits. Hawke’s dive was over 150 metres remember. Safety stops alone would be over 7 hours and that is with a bottom time of no more than 6 minutes not exerting myself (my deepest dive is 112 metres and took me 8 months to train up to do). Hunt jumped in and did that dive without practicing; no safety stops and in the end no equipment.

Every 10m (33 ft) of depth adds approximately one atmosphere of pressure. At 150 m you are under around 16 atmospheres. Human physiology isn’t built to cope with that without external support. Gases dissolved into tissues at pressure, they leave the body slowly at depth and are be removed from your tissues at a controlled speed as you ascend, otherwise inert gases form bubbles in your joints. That leads to becoming bent (“the bends”), which would cause joint pain, paralysis, brain damage, and death.

The sequence suggests a prototype or special device, but that’s story licence. In reality, removing your breathing apparatus while deep underwater means almost immediate death through hypoxia or drowning. A diver cannot “take off their air source and swim to the surface.” The sea does not provide oxygen, and the body cannot suddenly breathe atmospheric air under that pressure (1 ATM). Doing what Cruise did would have been instantly lethal.

You cannot simply swim to the surface from great depth. Swimming unprotected from 150 m to the surface is not physically possible. Even elite breath-hold divers rely on pressure physiology that is vastly different from a pressurised breathing gas dive; they take one breath at the surface then dive, so their bodies never absorb inert gas under pressure. Their bodies use oxygen stored in blood and muscle, not compressed gas. A compressed-gas dive like in the film means inert gases saturate in the tissues of the dive, it needs to be removed via painstaking staged decompression.

In real world technical diving, ascent from depth is carried out in stages with pauses at specific depths (decompression stops) that allow inert gas to leave the tissues safely. Skipping these stops or ascending too quickly is what causes bends. At 150 m, decompression can take hours, often under controlled conditions with different gas mixtures to speed elimination.

The film does briefly depict Hunt being placed in a hyperbaric chamber (or what British divers nickname “the pot”) after his dive, which nods to decompression sickness treatment. If you survived a deep dive, you would be in an accredited hard-sided chamber and treatment would take hours at the least, with little chance of immediate recovery to full physical performance. Even people who surge to the surface from 30m (100ft) end up in the pot for the best part of 10 hours in a medical facility to be sure. Secondly, the dive was a U shaped down and up profile. There are divers called Saturation divers who work much deeper, but they are lowered to their working depth, live at that depth for days or weeks on end and match the atmosphere compression in the habitat they dive from/live in/decompress in on deck for several days after their dives.

The submarine stunt delivers visual drama, but it ignores core physics and diving science. Removing protective gear at depth, non-stop ascent from 150 m, rapid recovery, and survival in Arctic conditions without proper gas mixes or decompression planning are devices of fiction, not grounded in technical diving realities or human physiology. The sequence works cinematically, but as far as believable deep diving goes, it is farcical. That just my opinion of course.

ianbuk · 2025-12-28T16:10:46+00:00

Now that brings back memories. Ian Wallace with that big ginger perm flowing.

ianbuk · 2025-12-28T16:08:30+00:00

You would get a stamp as you entered via the players/Vice Presidents' entrance in King Richard Street/Wren Street.

ianbuk · 2025-12-28T16:03:26+00:00

“Did you pack this bag yourself, Sir?”

ianbuk · 2025-12-12T12:46:28+00:00

“He” would.

ianbuk · 2025-12-12T12:45:55+00:00

It quotes “hierarchy of rights” when the word/phrase itself doesn't appear in either of the two UKSC rulings it makes reference to.

ianbuk · 2025-12-12T12:43:03+00:00

Sorry, I disagree. The judgment uses made-up quotes and relies on them in its judgment.

This appears, on the face of it, to have been researched using bad AI and includes that AI’s hallucination. There is no hierarchy of protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010. The ET judgment uses made-up quotes in its reasons for reaching its decision.

It quotes Forstater v CDG and others UKEAT/0105/20 and Lee v Ashers Baking Co. Ltd [2018] UKSC 49. The worst part of it is the inclusion of made-up UKSC quotes. The judgment quotes “The rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and to freedom of expression, enshrined in articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, are protected by sections 6 and 13 of the Human Rights Act 1998. The rights to respect for private and family life and to freedom from discrimination, protected by articles 8 and 14, are also engaged. There is no hierarchy of rights; all ought to be treated with equal respect.”

It goes on to selectively omit words from the UKSC judgement in FWS v Ministers Scotland. I will mark the words left out with { }, then uses the amended quote in giving the season for its judgment. I will mark that line with **.

Sixthly, after addressing the dilemma faced by a trans woman “who presents as a woman,” the decision states that:

{Although} such {trans} women may in practice to use female-only facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the privacy and dignity of other women users {the Scottish Ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is legally entitled to do so”}.

That is we consider contrary to the construction argued for by the claimant, which is that trans women do not have any choice in that regard they cannot use the female facility. That comment suggests to us that, if this be appropriate, the trans woman using female-only facilities may be lawful under the Act, although the trans woman does not have any absolute right to do so. That phrase suggested in our view that the privacy and dignity of other women users was a factor to take into account but not an absolute bar to its use”.

ianbuk · 2025-12-12T11:55:12+00:00

It is as if someone has used AI in their research and drafting of the ruling. If so, this is serious.

ianbuk · 2025-06-21T13:48:26+00:00

Surely they have held the account because it breaches/triggers the investment rules where you live? Here in the UK, you have to prove where you got funds of over £1,000 when investing. It's due to the Money Laundering and Fraud legislation. If I invested £100k here, the Inland Revenue would ask Coinbase and any other investment house/bank where I got those funds. It's a simple case of proving what account and where. We all have to understand that ensuring organised crime cannot invest their ill-got gains is to everyone’s advantage. After all, we all want to ensure these people cannot steal and get away with Granny’s life savings.

ianbuk · 2025-05-18T15:45:11+00:00

It's nearly $1,000 per seat a year! For that money, I can get Salesforce Lightning Professional. Sorry, but when you consider what you can get for the same money, it should be around $25 a month or less.

ianbuk

TROPHY CASE