Tim Smith

@Tw0zy @SamadSpeak Agree!

@SamadSpeak I got 144, and I dont see a single person that also said that. So now im either concerned I dont know math or im concerned everybody else doesnt know math

Solve it with out calculator 🤔 Let's check your smartness..!

@demispider66 @SamadSpeak I agree

@SamadSpeak 144, I believe 8x8 = 64 72 - 8 = 64 Therefore, 72 + 72 = 144 Youd probably wonder if it could be negative, but no. That'd either equal -80 or -64.

@SamadSpeak 144

@Js_3636 72

Test your logic 🧠 What is the value of 10+10=?

@OfficialJoel4_ 33, 88, 101

Level- VERY HARD. Eye test 😎 Can you find the missing number ?? 👀 One Correct Answer Wins 💰$500

@OfficialJoel4_ 6 ‘A’s

Well, Most difficult eye 👀 test on the Internet How many letter "A" do you see ? Correct answer wins $350 Ends 17th April

@Eman_8282 It’s too easy!!

@atensnut B

Careful.

@RachelReevesMP Unemployment! Free Speech Army! Navy! Taxation! Deficit! Crime! All change for the worse! Resign Now Fabian!

Minimum wage rising 📈 State pension increasing 💷 Two child limit abolished 🏡 Child poverty falling 📉 Rights at work strengthened 💪🏻 Labour promised change. We are delivering change. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

@OfficialJoel4_ 23

LEVEL- VERY HARD. How many Eggs do you see? Correct answer wins $950 Ends 48 hrs

@SqSehrish 30

What is the missing number? 🤯 Most people get stuck!

@Axel0__ 4 is different, only 4 lines plus a logo!

Which one is different ??

@ABridgen In my view the world is going backwards and we are entering a very dark place where we are shackled and mentally challenged by govts and ever increasing big tech complexities! It will all lead to mental illness and unemployment as we enter the new worldwide digital prisons!

Here's how your Smart TV provides access to the government and their agencies. They can view into your room and listen through the microphone in the Smart TV. The same access is available to Government and agencies through your computer, iPad, tablet ,phone etc Think about that!

@mcnaugha @silkiecarlo App Store??

@silkiecarlo Not updating won’t help either. They will require the age check to use their services. The products can still do everything else that isn’t a service that needs an Apple Account.

🚨I’ve written to urge @Apple to drop the age/ID check demand on the new iOS, which just child-locked tens of millions of phones in the UK. It’s extraordinary censorship, an invasion of privacy + chokehold on access to information. You can read it here: bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/upl…

@gimmbusy1 @Mishi_2210_ 17

Tell Me Can You Solve This??

@HumanBeing34061 @NAIRA680411 Trumpet

99% people cant give the right answer?????

@NAIRA680411 Allen Key

Almost 50% people fail Any guess what is this.?

@Harvey4Jan A very Happy Birthday Mr Y hope you’re having a great day! Sorry to hear about your fall but glad to hear you’re back in shape! Always a legend Mr Masters!

It’s Mr Y’s 84th birthday ! And here finally is the official photo . My Y sporting a small reminder of the catastrophic fall he sustained in the first week of December - now fully recovered. Love to all you HW Lovelies out there and thanks for all the good wishes x

@Mishi_2210 22

@JChimirie66677 Absolutely disgraceful and very worrying indeed! A government once this is in place has fewer people to lean on to get the results they need!

There is a moment when a government stops pretending to listen. David Lammy has reached that moment. The Justice Secretary is pressing ahead with judge-only trials despite opposition from his own MPs, the legal profession, former law officers and the review he himself commissioned. That tells you everything. The decision has already been made. The debate is now theatre. The excuse is the court backlog. Victims are waiting years. Cases are piling up. Justice is delayed. All true. But what comes next is the tell. Instead of fixing the broken system, the government has chosen to remove the public from it. Instead of repairing justice, it is downgrading it. State failure has become the justification for shrinking liberty. This is the inversion at the heart of the plan. The courts were starved of funding for decades. Courtrooms closed. Judges retired and were not replaced. Sitting days were cut. Barristers walked out because the system no longer paid them enough to survive. The backlog did not fall from the sky. It was created by political neglect. Now the same political class points to the chaos it allowed to grow and says the answer is to scrap jury trials. The arsonist now poses as the fireman and is asking to tear down the building. The most revealing line is the quiet admission that focus groups are not reacting. Ministers believe the public is not paying attention. That is the green light. When a government reshapes the justice system because it thinks voters will not notice, consent has already been abandoned. This is power acting without fear. Jury trial is not a quaint tradition. It is the moment when the state has to step out of its own system and persuade ordinary people that someone is guilty. Twelve citizens, not paid by the government and not part of the legal machine, must be convinced before the state can take a person's liberty away. That is the safeguard. Take the jury away and that barrier disappears. The police investigate, the state prosecutes, and a judge working inside the same system decides the outcome. Accusation, judgment and punishment all happen within one closed loop. The public is no longer part of the process. The state no longer has to convince society. It only has to convince itself. That is not a small procedural tweak. It is a fundamental shift in who holds power. Justice stops being something done in the name of the people and becomes something done to the people by the state. That is not efficiency. It is convenience for power. The tragedy is that there was another path. The government could have funded more courtrooms and reopened the ones it closed. It could have hired more judges, clerks and prosecutors. It could have expanded sitting days, modernised case management and invested in the infrastructure that keeps justice moving. It could have treated the courts as essential national infrastructure rather than a budget line to be trimmed. That would have reduced delays without touching the rights of the accused. That would have fixed the system instead of hollowing it out. But that path requires money, patience and humility. Scrapping juries requires only legislation and a majority. One path serves justice. The other serves government convenience. The choice tells you everything about the priorities of the people in charge. The most damning fact is not that they are doing this. It is that they are doing it knowingly, against the warnings, against the opposition, and without fear of the public reaction. A government that no longer fears the people has already crossed a dangerous line. The removal of juries is not the end of the story. It is the proof that the relationship between citizen and state is being quietly rewritten in real time. "David Lammy [...] is pressing ahead with judge-only trials despite opposition from his own MPs, the legal profession, former law officers and the review he himself commissioned."