https://twitter.com/joshcheetham/status/1760370609261777052
it's not sunk! it's still above the water!
it's not runaway inflation! the rate is half of what it was last year!
it's not pseudofascist culture war! there's a lot about the progressive left to be afraid of!
I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you! neener neener
Al-Qaeda say they have taken out the World Trade Center towers, but we’ve obtained pictures from 9:58 a.m. today showing them still standing
Al-Qaeda say they have taken out the World Trade Center towers, but it was actually the planes that did it.
They're really going for the
We're technically correct, the best kind of correctWell sure, mate. You never put somethin' in the boot? Since I likes ya, I'll say it's now or never for this beaut. I got a few other folks who've shown interest. Might not be available for long, if you know what I mean.
lol, the insurance company sending a link to this article attached to the claim denial and having to eat it due to the weakest copium
Image having to deal this this for 30 hours straight while towing it to port.
https://youtu.be/hDfED-kLGi4?si=iqB7-HmGbZ0ASbsg
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I will grant you that the ship in this picture has not sunk. But this looks like a situation where we're gonna need continual hourly updates on if the ship has sunk for... one or two hours?
'actually according to the BBC you can't quadruple my insurance rates behold:
Show'
Willfully sailing your ship into an active war zone that you’ve been explicitly and repeatedly warned will result in the sinking of your ship sounds like literally the most perfect grounds for claim denial that there could ever exist
It’s like submitting a life insurance claim after your dad volunteered to be a crash test dummy
I wonder if there's a way to defraud the government here. I assume the british PM made some sort of announcement about securing the Red Sea. If there's some law in the books where corporations can request indemnity due to the failure of government policy, why a choice judge might even grant it.
Nah, not by Royal Navy standards. I doubt the average tanker crew has slave laborers washing their clothes for them. The Royal Navy knows you shouldn’t go sailing if you have to wash your own clothes.
The metaphors for the end of Western imperialism are going to write themselves or be written by deadly serious libs with less irony than a British steel plant.
I don't know about ships. Is it possible for a ship this fucked to be restored? Is it worth the effort?
Because if not, this literally fits the definition of "sunk" in the context of a conflict because it's out of commission. Even better because probably there were fewer casualties than a fully sunk ship.
Depends a lot of the ship's construction. They might have a lot of rooms under board that can be sealed individually, so in this picture it might have stopped sinking, and is fine. Then you can re-float it and get the punctures fixed at a drydock somewhere. It would still cost a shitload, supposing the thing isn't totalled, of course, which is the hidden variable here. If it's not sinked, but fixing it is not feasible, then it's as good as sinked, it's only good for scrap.
Also the engine room was flooded, so I think the only yard this vessel will ever see again is a shipbreaking yard.
just read the article, yeah apparently they hit the engine room, who knows what state it's in, shit's fucked, my money's on scrap too; hope it was insured! lmao
The one insurance lawyer that made sure wartime damages aren't covered
Perfect analogy for the UK. Nuh-uh we haven't sunk, we're still technically above the water line.
Low - Rye - Duh 
