Why King Charles III should NOT meet with Trump April 2026

It is common knowledge that Trump has bullied and insulted the UK. He has insulted the country's Prime Minister - I hate Starmer but I strongly object to Trump insulting him - and the UK's armed forces. King Charles is the head of the armed forces.

Trump has insulted France in insulting Macron and Macron's wife. He has alienated America's allies. Trump has more or less destroyed 80 years of trust between the US and its allies and is threatening to badly damage NATO.

Trump is probably certifiably, borderline mentally ill. He is a bully. He is arrogant. He is a narcissist. He has psychopathic traits. He enjoys war pornography as does Pete Hegseth, who treats the war on Iran as some sort of comic book distraction. America chose to attack Iran and without any discussion with its allies or seek congressional approval.

If King Charles visits Trump in April it will be a strong signal that the UK approves Trump's bizarre, chaotic and contradictory behaviour. Charles cannot agree with this behaviour. He must hate it.

It is time for the UK to rebuke Trump. To push back. To complain. To protect its dignity. That sycophantic moment when Starmer handed King Charles's letter of initiation to a second state visit makes me sick. It was horrible.

Yes, there was an underlying purpose - to reduce tariffs - but since that horrible White House moment Trump has walked all over the UK.

It is time for the UK to criticise Trump. The so called special relationship has been exposed for what it is: fragile and ultimately a mutually beneficial deal when it suits America.

King Charles cannot visit Trump in April. He will be, by implication, endorsing Trump's wild and immoral behaviour. Charles's visit is a gift to Trump. The opposite to what should be happening.

---------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Tiger Woods' cascading pain problems undermine his iconic status

Here is a thought. Tiger Woods' huge hitting power when he was the world's best golfer was attained by putting an enormous amount of stress on his body. He is not a particularly tall man. But he hit the ball huge distances. He achieved it by a big turn in the backswing and a very coiled swing which unleased enormous speed on the downswing. 

All this over time stressed his back to the point where it damaged it badly causing a lot of pain. He had to have surgery on this back. More pain, more surgery and more painkillers which impaired his car driving which incidentally he insisted on doing himself because he decided that when he is driving he has - for a brief time - some personal privacy and solitude.

He could have afforded a full-time chauffer. Of course he could have because he is worth an estimated one billion US dollars.

But no he insisted on driving which resulted in car accidents which in turn damaged his right leg to the point where surgeons contemplated cutting it off! It was damaged that badly when he went off the road and rolled his car. 

The incident: Tiger Woods’ 2021 crash occurred when his SUV rolled over in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, leaving him with severe injuries, including multiple fractures to his right leg. He was trapped in the vehicle and required emergency surgery after being extracted. Authorities reported it as a single‑car collision, with no evidence of impairment. The crash left his career in jeopardy, though he later made a limited return to golf.

My guess (allegation) is that he fell asleep at the wheel because of the cocktail of painkillers he was taking at the time.

And his right leg plus his bad back cause him pain 24-7 it appears such that he continues to take addictive opioid painkillers 24-7 I suspect which impairs his driving skills to the point where he has been charged with DUI recently. He has pleaded not guilty and he is innocent until proven guilty. But he refused a urine test which - as I understand it - is strict liability. He has almost no defence to that. 

But the point is that his golf swing and his fabulous skills (and massive success) have caused all these dire problems in his forced retirement and it will only get worse I predict as he gets older. It is one way traffic to a kind of pain-swamped hell in perpetuity I am sad to say for perhaps the world's greatest ever golfer.

He is paying a price that is too high. If he had had a smoother and less demanding golf swing in his heyday and hit the ball about 10% shorter he might have protected his back which would have prevented all this driving and pain meds mayhem in relative old age. Yes, he may have won less tournaments but it would have been better for him overall.

His problems are self-inflicted. He is adored by kids. He is setting a bad example at the moment. He won't be able to fix the hellish pain problem going forward but he can stop driving for good whether he likes it or not. Just to try and repair is iconic image.

----

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Can Purina LiveClear Help Cat Owners Ease Sinusitis? A Practical Test for Allergy‑Linked Symptoms

Brazilian Courts Gain Power to Order Shared Custody of Pets in Divorce

Brazil has taken a significant step in recognising the emotional importance of companion animals by granting courts the authority to order shared custody of pets when couples separate. The new federal law, approved in April 2026, responds to a growing number of disputes involving dogs, cats, and other domestic animals—now considered integral members of many Brazilian households.

Under the legislation, if a divorcing couple cannot reach an agreement on who keeps the pet, a judge may impose a joint‑custody arrangement. This can include alternating periods of care, shared financial responsibility for food, veterinary treatment, and other essential expenses, and even detailed schedules similar to those used in child‑custody cases.

Crucially, the law requires judges to consider the well‑being of the animal, assessing factors such as living conditions, time availability, and each partner’s caregiving history. Pets that have lived predominantly with the couple are treated as a form of shared property, but the law moves beyond a purely economic view by acknowledging their emotional significance.

There are important safeguards. Shared custody is prohibited if one partner has a criminal record or a history—or risk—of domestic violence. In such cases, courts may award exclusive custody to the safer environment to protect both the animal and the vulnerable partner.

Brazil is home to one of the world’s largest pet populations—estimated at more than 160 million animals—and lawmakers say the reform reflects modern family dynamics. With many couples choosing not to have children, pets often occupy a central emotional role, making separation disputes more complex.

By aligning itself with countries such as France and Spain, where pets are legally recognised as sentient beings, Brazil signals a broader cultural shift: animals are no longer viewed as mere possessions but as companions whose welfare deserves legal protection.

----

P.S. Sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Anxiety behind the rising popularity of the SUV

I am consistently mystified with the huge rise in popularity of these huge SUV vehicles. Many of them are electric vehicles but not all of them. The common denominator is their abnormally huge size. This must make them very hard to manoeuvre in tight places. I'd hate to drive one where I live. A nightmare.

On British roads they can become a handful. They will be nearly impossible to park in some parking facilities. They are simply unsuitable for many British urban road network environments. And yet the British consistently make them a very popular vehicle. 

I've been scratching my head as to why. I can only come to the conclusion that many British people are anxious about the deep-rooted problems that currently exist in British society with many public services broken or failing. Many people are anxious about world problems as well such as the possibility of a worldwide conflict.

Sitting in a big, powerful vehicle helps to assuage that anxiety giving the impression that they have control things. That they can dominate other road users. This I think is a psychological problem. There is no logical, practical reason why people should prefer large SUV vehicles. It has to be an emotional problem which these purchasers have yet to realise. Ironically the difficulty in driving these cars might make the driver anxious! 😢

Most car purchases are made on emotional issues. Many people don't buy a car because they are practical. They buy a car because they like the look of it but then of course when they have to drive it down a tight road in London or in the suburbs of London with cars parked either side and a bus coming in the other direction, they realise that they might have made the wrong choice.

There must be many instances of conflict between wives and husbands when deciding to purchase a new vehicle. Is it that the men want a super-large SUV and the wife wants a small more practical vehicle because they are more manoeuvrable? Without wishing to be in any way sexist, I suspect that many women find it very hard to drive these large vehicles. 

I was at a dealership the other day when I bumped into a middle-aged married couple. They came to the dealership in a large SUV and I got talking to the wife and she said that the family car was too wide for her. She wanted a smaller car but her husband had convinced her to buy it. She longingly looked at a small compact new car for sale in the showroom. I think this little encounter tells a story which is unfolding across the country.

And, you won't be able to park one of the huge SUV vehicles in a John Lewis car park with all that concrete. If you park in the Kingston upon Thames John Lewis car park you will notice a huge number of scratches on the concrete pillars and walls. Every one of those scratches represents thousands of pounds of body repair work! 

And I suspect that all of them are caused by drivers being unable to navigate their huge SUVs around a very tight space. These vehicles are impractical and it's time people put aside their emotional issues and became far more logical and sensible in their choices.

----------------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.