By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
What you do at the roadside and then do on reflection after getting home are not the same thing.
Maybe the driver was suffering a little bit of shock, couldn't think what to say at the roadside so acted sympathetically. Or, maybe another vehicle, not involved with the original incident, sent their footage of the whole thing into Operation Snap?
My mum passed from Panc C in 2012. 7 weeks from diagnosis to the end. Sadly the symptoms you describe seem horrifically similar.
Pancreatic Cancer is one of the worst cancers to get for morbidity, mainly owing to the difficulties in diagnosis, often mistaken for heartburn/GERD. If your Aunt got the Whipple, and then got a further 12 months with Panc C that's something of a success.
It could be that the cancer has spread and she now has a secondary cancer, but if she's the type that doesn't want to trouble people then I don't know how likely it is that she'll tell you?
I hate to say this, but if she's that weak and losing weight, then it tends to be a fairly quick outcome.
Believe the 14 days only applied on speeding fines. This would have gone directly to Plod I would have thought. Injury claim should be settled by the insurance in most cases.
If you rear end a car, irrespective of the car ahead being erratic, it'll be due care and attention every time. You have to leave enough room to come to a stop without hitting the car in front should it suddenly stop. If you hit them, you can't have left enough room by definition.
On the basis of what I've seen so far, it looks like all three are playing with a low block and putting everyone behind the ball rather than trying to go toe to toe and play their way to safety.
What you say is true, but it goes far far beyond that. It's too complex an issue to go into on a single post, but the delegitimisation of traditional media sources began sometime ago and increased exponentially in the wake of 9/11.
Traditional media (the term 'MSM' is one deliberately devised to speed up the decline in trust of traditional news delivery).
A legitimate press does not serve the new era of authoritarianism that is now part of our daily lives, not exclusive to world leaders however, we now have authoritarian 'influencers' too. If people don't trust the traditional media, where do they get their news? Social Media in the main, unregulated, unchecked and often without sound basis. But why would the media be trusted? Trump, Putin, Johnson, Farage, Musk, Zukerberg, Tate, Robinson et al all say it can't be trusted, 'fake news'.
The orchestrated campaign by populists to systematically remove trust in traditional media by all sources gives people like Trump, Netenyahooo, Putin and co, give just enough mistrust to make many believe that things really are as these types of people say, despite being presented with irrefutable proof to the contrary.
I have to say that the legitimate press made it very easy by being caught in multiple scandals and not getting its house in order quickly enough, but, at least we found out about those and people lost their jobs or were imprisioned in some cases.
We never see what scandals 'citizen journalists' and algorithms are involved in do we?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
