Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Liz Truss may have lost but she isn’t forgotten – politicalbetting.com

123457»

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Luke Tryl
    @LukeTryl
    ·
    13h

    Think Farage is in danger of speaking to his online audience rather than body of Reform voters here. Speaking to Reform voters since the unrest, there was no “but” just straight out condemnation of rioters and total rejection rioters are standing up for Britain.


    Edit: The new tory leader may get very lucky very early if Farage continues down this path.

    If he hadn't done it before, Farage has definitely jumped the shark on this one.
    I think he's been remarkably restrained. Indeed maybe too much so

    He made one 90 second video saying “there are questions to be asked, legitimately” and that is clearly true and fair. And that’s it
    What are the questions?
    Really? REALLY?

    Just think for yourself. I don’t want to get banned again for the 19th time in a week but examine the evidence we have and do some digging and then think for yourself rather than relying on pabulum fed you by mainstream media which - remember - told us he was a good Welsh boy of 17 from a nice family and maybe he’s a bit autistic so that’s all it is

    Insane drivel
    Peter Hitchens wrote a few years back that until recently the British Police would deal with all demostrators/rioters in the same way.

    In contrast, the response of the French police would depend on whether the government politicians sympathised with the demonstrators /rioters. If so then kid gloves time. If not then it would be all truncheons and tear gas.

    Alas, our police are now similarly politicised in their response to such matters.

    That is the issue.
    Really? How?

    Seems to me the Police take a fairly consistent approach to rioters and have done since the London riots onwards (if not before): stand back, film it all, round up the perps later.
    I deleted it as I posted it before I saw what had happened to Sunderland Nick and having read that it didn't seem the best time.

    However as you responded, there was a distinct lack of riot gear etc at the Harehill riots and the BLM protests during lockdown when gatherings were banned and police took the knee to protestors.
    Which perhaps says something about how non-violent the latter were versus the coked up thugs looking for a fight tonight.
    Not only were they non violent they were mostly peaceful too !

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-flee-protesters-clash-black-lives-matter-demonstrations-a4462296.html#:~:text=Police were filmed running from,objects at them on Sunday.
    It's the liberal throat clearing. It's not difficult. Have the riot gear and dogs on standby and if it gets out of hand go in and knock heads. That should be the standing rules of engagement. But it isn't, except when the people doing the protesting are white and working class.
    I don't want them to go easy on those protesters in Sunderland. Bring out the tear gas, get the horses out do what you need to do.
    Just don't do it differently when they aren't white and working class. There was nothing peaceful about what happened in Leeds.

    The far-right pre-announced its plans so the police were prepared. The Harehill riots were more spontaneous so the police had to react and understandably it took them longer to do so. That's not two-tier policing, it's two very different scenarios. But people will believe what they want to believe.

    I personally witnessed BLM protestors hunting down and beating white people for being white - and almost murdering them - in trafalgar square and Whitehall. In the BLM riots/protests of 2021

    Easily as bad as anything we’ve seen in the post-
    Southport riots. Yet all the lefties on here cheered on the BLM thuggery. It is arrant hypocrisy
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    On the front page of the Telegraph, Kemi Badenoch demonstrates that she doesn't understand the Ship of Theseus analogy.

    What that front page illustrates perfectly is that Badenoch knows her electorate very well. They are more comfortable blaming immigrants for not integrating than they are condemning far-right riots that target entirely innocent people.

    It's amazing the lengths people will go to to avoid the "are we the baddies?" question.

    Who is better integrated into society? The rioters, or the people clearing up after them?
    I'll help you - Labour are the baddies

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,512

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,921

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    Are we to welcome Casino Royale into the ranks of those who seek an end to the present useless voting system?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Leon said:

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes exactly. And 17,000 so far this year

    I predicted the Starmer government could implode quite quickly over migration/asylum/boats

    It may happen even quicker than I thought. Because they have absolutely no idea what to do about any of this, and their natural instincts are to let in even more people - even as the mood of the country swings firmly against any almost form of immigration

    Seriously, what is their plan for the boats? A “border command task force”. It’s risible bureaucratic nonsense and it’s being exposed cruelly and speedily
    Yes. All Labour’s fault. Nothing whatsoever to do with the good weather and favourable crossing conditions we’ve been having down here in Kent/Pas de Calais this week and last.

    People would take you and @Casino_Royale more seriously if you tried to analyse and question the issues rather than make this site a whinge fest for your mutual hobbyhorses and partisan hackery. Why not take the day off and join your mates setting fire to a police station for what are no doubt “valid concerns” about (ahem)”immigration”.

    The two of you moaning about the insidious “mainstream media” when one of you is embedded into it up to his neck is beyond parody.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,483
    edited August 3

    Brompton said:

    pm215 said:

    Brompton said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    LIVE: Secret Service gives statement on Donald Trump shooting
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie6vymZpXuY

    Interesting that one factor identified is different agencies being on their own radio networks. This issue of inter-agency communication (and the lack of it) has also been a factor in this country, for instance the Ariana Grande concert bombing.
    I just don’t buy this. Not only was the shooter the only 20 year old in America with literally zero internet presence - and no motivation? - but it turns out his home is as “clean as a lab”. Not a speck of evidence either way or anything. A 20 year old guy with a home as “clean as a lab”?

    The whole thing is exceptionally suspicious

    And, for clarity, I’ve no idea who recruited him or why or how or anything, but I feel pretty sure this is not the whole story
    Its fairly obvious who recruited him. He was described as dangerously inaccurate by his schook rifle club. The only people likely to recruit him is the people being shot at.
    They recruited him because they knew his shooting was so poor the best he could do was hit Trump's ear?
    The TDS explanation for the shooting is the most deranged thing I’ve ever heard. And I have heard otherwise intelligent people espouse it irl. ThT Trump staged a shooting by a loser kid, to just miss his head, in order to win sympathy votes. I mean really. I wouldn’t trust that Turkish Olympic gangsta shooter to just graze my ear from 150m, yet alone some incel kid thrown out his high school shooting team.
    Unlike you to snub a ludicrous conspiracy theory. It'll be confused and a little hurt.
    You should look up the origin of the phrase “conspiracy theory”. It might be informative for how you assess the information you’re presented.
    Yes happy to do that. I like my assessment technique but there's always room for betterment.
    “Conspiracy theory” is essentially a catch all term to discredit any narrative that is inconvenient if believed more widely. We’ve seen a number of “conspiracy theories” eventually validated over the years. There tends to be a common denominator that it’s US 3 letter agencies that end up looking bad.
    And we've seen far, far more convincingly disproved: pizzagate, every aspect of QAnon, COVID-19 vaccine dangers, flat Earth, chemtrails, crisis actors, the Oklahoma City bombing and the 2004 Madrid train bombings being false flag operations, ditto the Las Vegas shooting, 9/11 being an inside job or Jews have warning of it, Obama not being born in the US, Michelle Obama being a man, the Trump assassination attempt being the Dems, the Southport knife attacker being a Muslim immigrant, etc. etc. etc. etc.
    Conversely, every miscarriage of justice case in the UK is a conspiracy theory until it isn't. Ho ho, are you seriously claiming that the most scrupulously just criminal law courts in the world, assisted by incredibly talented barristers and clever expert witnesses, and with multiple layers of appeal to judges of ever increasing learnedness, wrongly convicted Christie and the Birmingham six and Hallam and Nealon and Malkinson and nearly 1,000 subpostmasters? And a thousand others you can Google for yourself? I mean between their conviction and their exoneration, how does the theory that they are innocent not count as a conspiracy theory?

    Helpful hint: the best way of deciding whether a theory is true or not, is to examine the evidence for and against it. Popping up a level and saying This is a type X theory and type X theories tend to be T or F is a lazy get out. Especially so when X is ill defined and can often be a cover for Theories I happen to think are T or F and I want a nice blanket put down of.
    The problem with that is that the people who love to spread conspiracy theories can generate theories really quite profusely, much more easily than a random person can do investigations of the evidence for each one. So the "lazy get out" (or "practical way to avoid wasting too much time on rubbish") is important. For instance, a
    random theory off social media is not likely worth my time to think about; a suggestion of a miscarriage of justice raised by Private Eye or Computer Weekly is at minimum best not dismissed out of hand. And a theory which requires a massive conspiracy among many people in prominent positions is unlikely to be true.
    The post office fuckup falsifies your final sentence so conclusively that it's hard to imagine how you managed to type it.
    Has it been proved that the post office was a conspiracy?

    Rather than a lot of weak people who were in positions above their capabilities doing what was easiest and most convenient for them personally?
    The PO Inquiry has finished taking evidence, so now is a good time to pause and reflect on where we are.

    It was indeed a very broad conspiracy spreading over more than twenty years, and worsening as time went on. It covered all ranks, from the most junior investigators through to the most senior managers and Board Members. Numerous consultants, lawyers (internal and external), civil servants and Ministers were also implicated. The legal profession comes out of it particularly badly.

    The charges could fall on hundreds, if not thousands, but this would probably be a mistake because if the net is spread too wide, legal proceedings become unwieldy and impractical. Far better to focus on the clearly defineable conspiracies, of which there are plenty.

    I suspect and hope that the CPS will focus on the Clark letter, which was delivered to the PO's chief Counsel at the time, Susan Crichton. It should have gone straight to the Board via the CEO (Vennells) and Chairman (Perkins). Why it did not is disputed and unclear, and it seems to me that this is a suitable matter for a jury to decide.

    The strongest other candidates for prosecution would include former chairman Tim Parker, head of security John Scott, Vennell's gopher Angela van den Bogern, hapless civil servant Richard Callard, and Fujitsu stooges Andy Dunk and Gareth Jenkins (who has virtually confessed anyway.)

    The legal bods may well be left to the Law Society, although one would hope that it would administer more than the usual mild slap on the wrist. Its problem would be that the transagressions were committed by a very wide range of the profession's members - from the risible Jarnail Singh to eminent KCs such as Altman and Grabiner, whose disastrously unwise advice to the PO threatened to derail the whole process of uncovering what has rightly been described as the biggest miscarriage of justice in British history.

    Btw, this Site's leading authority on the subject, Ms Cyclefree, is currently writing a book on this and other public scandals. This partly explains her absence. Should be a good read.
    "It was indeed a very broad conspiracy spreading over more than twenty years,"

    Was it a single conspiracy, or a multitude of cover-your-backside conspiracies and individual lies? I haven't been watching the inquiry as closely as I perhaps should, but my impression is that, for much of the time, there was no overarching conspiracy; just people lying to themselves and their superiors, and superiors lying to their superiors and underlings. A series of lies by individuals (not conspiracies), and conspiracies involving a handful of people.

    If there was an overlying conspiracy, it came later when the sh*t really started to hit the fan for the PO.

    Is there any validity in that view?
    In his evidence, Pat McFadden spoke of an evolving process which began as a cock-up (the implementation of Horizon) and grew and mutated over time until it became a widespread conspiracy (the cover-up of evidence which would have indicated the size and scope of the miscarriages of justice). I think that's a decent overview, and it's why I think the CPS would do well to focus on specific instances, such as the Clarke letter, the sacking of Second Sight, and the suppession of the Deloittes investigation and warnings. These are clearly culpable and evidence of a conspiracy. All those involved are tainted and should be prosecuted.

    There are also a number of clearly defineable illegal acts, such as the multiple failures by numerous lawyers to disclose evidence which would have assisted defendants, and of course false evidence given under oath to the Courts by Gareth Jenkins and others.

    If these and the more obvious crimes are prosecuted we would probably see convictions, and that would serve as some kind of warning to others.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    He’s not a proper fascist. He’s not invaded anyone
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    He’s not a proper fascist. He’s not invaded anyone
    Neither did Franco.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited August 3
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes exactly. And 17,000 so far this year

    I predicted the Starmer government could implode quite quickly over migration/asylum/boats

    It may happen even quicker than I thought. Because they have absolutely no idea what to do about any of this, and their natural instincts are to let in even more people - even as the mood of the country swings firmly against any almost form of immigration

    Seriously, what is their plan for the boats? A “border command task force”. It’s risible bureaucratic nonsense and it’s being exposed cruelly and speedily
    Yes. All Labour’s fault. Nothing whatsoever to do with the good weather and favourable crossing conditions we’ve been having down here in Kent/Pas de Calais this week and last.

    People would take you and @Casino_Royale more seriously if you tried to analyse and question the issues rather than make this site a whinge fest for your mutual hobbyhorses and partisan hackery. Why not take the day off and join your mates setting fire to a police station for what are no doubt “valid concerns” about (ahem)”immigration”.

    The two of you moaning about the insidious “mainstream media” when one of you is embedded into it up to his neck is beyond parody.
    What is Labour’s plan for the boats? How are they going to stop them?

    They are in power now. They have a huge majority. They can do what they want

    What is their plan and how will it work?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,419

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    That's the system. In the words of Sir Humphrey, this is a British democracy.
    Indeed it is, but the contention was that she represents Britain.

    She doesn't.
    She most certainly does, a lot better than most people who were Tory MPs three months ago. She just got elected to the Westminster Parliament of the UK ('Britain' is inaccurate, and loaded in this context anyway).
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,253

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    Stoking up tension and persecution of religious minorities.

    Being best buddies with other authoritarian leaders, in particular Putin.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Luke Tryl
    @LukeTryl
    ·
    13h

    Think Farage is in danger of speaking to his online audience rather than body of Reform voters here. Speaking to Reform voters since the unrest, there was no “but” just straight out condemnation of rioters and total rejection rioters are standing up for Britain.


    Edit: The new tory leader may get very lucky very early if Farage continues down this path.

    If he hadn't done it before, Farage has definitely jumped the shark on this one.
    I think he's been remarkably restrained. Indeed maybe too much so

    He made one 90 second video saying “there are questions to be asked, legitimately” and that is clearly true and fair. And that’s it
    What are the questions?
    Really? REALLY?

    Just think for yourself. I don’t want to get banned again for the 19th time in a week but examine the evidence we have and do some digging and then think for yourself rather than relying on pabulum fed you by mainstream media which - remember - told us he was a good Welsh boy of 17 from a nice family and maybe he’s a bit autistic so that’s all it is

    Insane drivel
    Peter Hitchens wrote a few years back that until recently the British Police would deal with all demostrators/rioters in the same way.

    In contrast, the response of the French police would depend on whether the government politicians sympathised with the demonstrators /rioters. If so then kid gloves time. If not then it would be all truncheons and tear gas.

    Alas, our police are now similarly politicised in their response to such matters.

    That is the issue.
    Really? How?

    Seems to me the Police take a fairly consistent approach to rioters and have done since the London riots onwards (if not before): stand back, film it all, round up the perps later.
    I deleted it as I posted it before I saw what had happened to Sunderland Nick and having read that it didn't seem the best time.

    However as you responded, there was a distinct lack of riot gear etc at the Harehill riots and the BLM protests during lockdown when gatherings were banned and police took the knee to protestors.
    Which perhaps says something about how non-violent the latter were versus the coked up thugs looking for a fight tonight.
    Not only were they non violent they were mostly peaceful too !

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-flee-protesters-clash-black-lives-matter-demonstrations-a4462296.html#:~:text=Police were filmed running from,objects at them on Sunday.
    It's the liberal throat clearing. It's not difficult. Have the riot gear and dogs on standby and if it gets out of hand go in and knock heads. That should be the standing rules of engagement. But it isn't, except when the people doing the protesting are white and working class.
    I don't want them to go easy on those protesters in Sunderland. Bring out the tear gas, get the horses out do what you need to do.
    Just don't do it differently when they aren't white and working class. There was nothing peaceful about what happened in Leeds.

    The far-right pre-announced its plans so the police were prepared. The Harehill riots were more spontaneous so the police had to react and understandably it took them longer to do so. That's not two-tier policing, it's two very different scenarios. But people will believe what they want to believe.

    I personally witnessed BLM protestors hunting down and beating white people for being white - and almost murdering them - in trafalgar square and Whitehall. In the BLM riots/protests of 2021

    Easily as bad as anything we’ve seen in the post-
    Southport riots. Yet all the lefties on here cheered on the BLM thuggery. It is arrant hypocrisy

    I'd invite you to find any post I have ever made anywhere on social media cheering on BLM thuggery. I know you want to believe it, desperately. But I'm afraid you wanting it to be true doesn't mean that it is.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,419
    edited August 3
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    He’s not a proper fascist. He’s not invaded anyone
    Neither did Franco.
    Er ... what did he do with all those Junkers 52 transports that his chum Adolf lent him?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,246
    edited August 3

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    It's a fair bit more than 23% of the vote on a 59% turnout, which the other lot got.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,165

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    He used to be an organiser for RSS, the uniformed Hindu paramilitary group that consciously modeled itself on European Fascist movements.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sangh
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Luke Tryl
    @LukeTryl
    ·
    13h

    Think Farage is in danger of speaking to his online audience rather than body of Reform voters here. Speaking to Reform voters since the unrest, there was no “but” just straight out condemnation of rioters and total rejection rioters are standing up for Britain.


    Edit: The new tory leader may get very lucky very early if Farage continues down this path.

    If he hadn't done it before, Farage has definitely jumped the shark on this one.
    I think he's been remarkably restrained. Indeed maybe too much so

    He made one 90 second video saying “there are questions to be asked, legitimately” and that is clearly true and fair. And that’s it
    What are the questions?
    Really? REALLY?

    Just think for yourself. I don’t want to get banned again for the 19th time in a week but examine the evidence we have and do some digging and then think for yourself rather than relying on pabulum fed you by mainstream media which - remember - told us he was a good Welsh boy of 17 from a nice family and maybe he’s a bit autistic so that’s all it is

    Insane drivel
    Peter Hitchens wrote a few years back that until recently the British Police would deal with all demostrators/rioters in the same way.

    In contrast, the response of the French police would depend on whether the government politicians sympathised with the demonstrators /rioters. If so then kid gloves time. If not then it would be all truncheons and tear gas.

    Alas, our police are now similarly politicised in their response to such matters.

    That is the issue.
    Really? How?

    Seems to me the Police take a fairly consistent approach to rioters and have done since the London riots onwards (if not before): stand back, film it all, round up the perps later.
    I deleted it as I posted it before I saw what had happened to Sunderland Nick and having read that it didn't seem the best time.

    However as you responded, there was a distinct lack of riot gear etc at the Harehill riots and the BLM protests during lockdown when gatherings were banned and police took the knee to protestors.
    Which perhaps says something about how non-violent the latter were versus the coked up thugs looking for a fight tonight.
    Not only were they non violent they were mostly peaceful too !

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-flee-protesters-clash-black-lives-matter-demonstrations-a4462296.html#:~:text=Police were filmed running from,objects at them on Sunday.
    It's the liberal throat clearing. It's not difficult. Have the riot gear and dogs on standby and if it gets out of hand go in and knock heads. That should be the standing rules of engagement. But it isn't, except when the people doing the protesting are white and working class.
    I don't want them to go easy on those protesters in Sunderland. Bring out the tear gas, get the horses out do what you need to do.
    Just don't do it differently when they aren't white and working class. There was nothing peaceful about what happened in Leeds.

    The far-right pre-announced its plans so the police were prepared. The Harehill riots were more spontaneous so the police had to react and understandably it took them longer to do so. That's not two-tier policing, it's two very different scenarios. But people will believe what they want to believe.

    I personally witnessed BLM protestors hunting down and beating white people for being white - and almost murdering them - in trafalgar square and Whitehall. In the BLM riots/protests of 2021

    Easily as bad as anything we’ve seen in the post-
    Southport riots. Yet all the lefties on here cheered on the BLM thuggery. It is arrant hypocrisy

    I'd invite you to find any post I have ever made anywhere on social media cheering on BLM thuggery. I know you want to believe it, desperately. But I'm afraid you wanting it to be true doesn't mean that it is.

    You’re accusing people here of tacitly cheering on the rioters by not denouncing them. My point is the same could be said of pb lefties - I don’t recall any of them “denouncing” the BLM marches. Starmer took the bloody knee FFS
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,419
    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster
    "British Riots" yet again.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,844
    ClippP said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    Are we to welcome Casino Royale into the ranks of those who seek an end to the present useless voting system?
    Its only useless if it doesn't favour your Party...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Luke Tryl
    @LukeTryl
    ·
    13h

    Think Farage is in danger of speaking to his online audience rather than body of Reform voters here. Speaking to Reform voters since the unrest, there was no “but” just straight out condemnation of rioters and total rejection rioters are standing up for Britain.


    Edit: The new tory leader may get very lucky very early if Farage continues down this path.

    If he hadn't done it before, Farage has definitely jumped the shark on this one.
    I think he's been remarkably restrained. Indeed maybe too much so

    He made one 90 second video saying “there are questions to be asked, legitimately” and that is clearly true and fair. And that’s it
    What are the questions?
    Really? REALLY?

    Just think for yourself. I don’t want to get banned again for the 19th time in a week but examine the evidence we have and do some digging and then think for yourself rather than relying on pabulum fed you by mainstream media which - remember - told us he was a good Welsh boy of 17 from a nice family and maybe he’s a bit autistic so that’s all it is

    Insane drivel
    Peter Hitchens wrote a few years back that until recently the British Police would deal with all demostrators/rioters in the same way.

    In contrast, the response of the French police would depend on whether the government politicians sympathised with the demonstrators /rioters. If so then kid gloves time. If not then it would be all truncheons and tear gas.

    Alas, our police are now similarly politicised in their response to such matters.

    That is the issue.
    Really? How?

    Seems to me the Police take a fairly consistent approach to rioters and have done since the London riots onwards (if not before): stand back, film it all, round up the perps later.
    I deleted it as I posted it before I saw what had happened to Sunderland Nick and having read that it didn't seem the best time.

    However as you responded, there was a distinct lack of riot gear etc at the Harehill riots and the BLM protests during lockdown when gatherings were banned and police took the knee to protestors.
    Which perhaps says something about how non-violent the latter were versus the coked up thugs looking for a fight tonight.
    Not only were they non violent they were mostly peaceful too !

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-flee-protesters-clash-black-lives-matter-demonstrations-a4462296.html#:~:text=Police were filmed running from,objects at them on Sunday.
    It's the liberal throat clearing. It's not difficult. Have the riot gear and dogs on standby and if it gets out of hand go in and knock heads. That should be the standing rules of engagement. But it isn't, except when the people doing the protesting are white and working class.
    I don't want them to go easy on those protesters in Sunderland. Bring out the tear gas, get the horses out do what you need to do.
    Just don't do it differently when they aren't white and working class. There was nothing peaceful about what happened in Leeds.

    The far-right pre-announced its plans so the police were prepared. The Harehill riots were more spontaneous so the police had to react and understandably it took them longer to do so. That's not two-tier policing, it's two very different scenarios. But people will believe what they want to believe.

    I personally witnessed BLM protestors hunting down and beating white people for being white - and almost murdering them - in trafalgar square and Whitehall. In the BLM riots/protests of 2021

    Easily as bad as anything we’ve seen in the post-
    Southport riots. Yet all the lefties on here cheered on the BLM thuggery. It is arrant hypocrisy

    I'd invite you to find any post I have ever made anywhere on social media cheering on BLM thuggery. I know you want to believe it, desperately. But I'm afraid you wanting it to be true doesn't mean that it is.

    You’re accusing people here of tacitly cheering on the rioters by not denouncing them. My point is the same could be said of pb lefties - I don’t recall any of them “denouncing” the BLM marches. Starmer took the bloody knee FFS

    I would not condemn anyone marching peacefully. I do condemn anyone rioting.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,811

    ClippP said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    Are we to welcome Casino Royale into the ranks of those who seek an end to the present useless voting system?
    It's only useless if it doesn't favour your Party...
    Sadly, that's a case of 'many a true word spoken in jest.'

    Political reforms in this country at least happen if they benefit the party in power. There is zero chance of Starmer meddling with a system that has just worked so dramatically in his favour.

    If there is a hung parliament next time, perhaps something will change then.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,512

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    Stoking up tension and persecution of religious minorities.

    Being best buddies with other authoritarian leaders, in particular Putin.
    Yes, and that's nasty. But is it fascism?

    I openly call Putin a fascist, as I think he and his government show all the signs of fascism by most definitions, e.g. Umberto Eco's list. But I find it hard to fit Modi into some of them; but that might be because I don't know Indian politics well enough.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,473
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes exactly. And 17,000 so far this year

    I predicted the Starmer government could implode quite quickly over migration/asylum/boats

    It may happen even quicker than I thought. Because they have absolutely no idea what to do about any of this, and their natural instincts are to let in even more people - even as the mood of the country swings firmly against any almost form of immigration

    Seriously, what is their plan for the boats? A “border command task force”. It’s risible bureaucratic nonsense and it’s being exposed cruelly and speedily
    Yes. All Labour’s fault. Nothing whatsoever to do with the good weather and favourable crossing conditions we’ve been having down here in Kent/Pas de Calais this week and last.

    People would take you and @Casino_Royale more seriously if you tried to analyse and question the issues rather than make this site a whinge fest for your mutual hobbyhorses and partisan hackery. Why not take the day off and join your mates setting fire to a police station for what are no doubt “valid concerns” about (ahem)”immigration”.

    The two of you moaning about the insidious “mainstream media” when one of you is embedded into it up to his neck is beyond parody.
    Given that the last week has had almost perfect crossing weather, 1000 in a week is progress. Not perfect, and clearly not just down to either government, but progress.

    Last September, the peak was 872 on a single day.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,811

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Just as not all Jews support Netanyahu, so not all Hindus support Modi.

    That's a pretty crass generalisation.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster

    It is true that there remain serious divisions between Catholic and Protestant communities in Scotland but the violence these days is far less pronounced than it was - even at Old Firm games.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes exactly. And 17,000 so far this year

    I predicted the Starmer government could implode quite quickly over migration/asylum/boats

    It may happen even quicker than I thought. Because they have absolutely no idea what to do about any of this, and their natural instincts are to let in even more people - even as the mood of the country swings firmly against any almost form of immigration

    Seriously, what is their plan for the boats? A “border command task force”. It’s risible bureaucratic nonsense and it’s being exposed cruelly and speedily
    Yes. All Labour’s fault. Nothing whatsoever to do with the good weather and favourable crossing conditions we’ve been having down here in Kent/Pas de Calais this week and last.

    People would take you and @Casino_Royale more seriously if you tried to analyse and question the issues rather than make this site a whinge fest for your mutual hobbyhorses and partisan hackery. Why not take the day off and join your mates setting fire to a police station for what are no doubt “valid concerns” about (ahem)”immigration”.

    The two of you moaning about the insidious “mainstream media” when one of you is embedded into it up to his neck is beyond parody.
    Given that the last week has had almost perfect crossing weather, 1000 in a week is progress. Not perfect, and clearly not just down to either government, but progress.

    Last September, the peak was 872 on a single day.
    Ahahahaha
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,253
    Following Franco, the monarchy was reestablished.

    It would be a shock if the same happened post-Modi.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,170
    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster
    Things are worse in Wick than I thought.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Is Modi a fascist/ TBF I know enough about him to know I don't like him, or his politics, but not enough to classify him.

    What traits of fascism does he embody?
    Stoking up tension and persecution of religious minorities.

    Being best buddies with other authoritarian leaders, in particular Putin.
    Yes, and that's nasty. But is it fascism?

    I openly call Putin a fascist, as I think he and his government show all the signs of fascism by most definitions, e.g. Umberto Eco's list. But I find it hard to fit Modi into some of them; but that might be because I don't know Indian politics well enough.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism
    I agree. I don’t think modi is a classic fascist - he’s not a pleasant chap but he’s not a fascist. Putin is surely much closer. And the Iranian regime
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,419

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster
    Things are worse in Wick than I thought.
    Did you see the rioting* in Hawick the other day? And it's all kicking off* in Fivepenny Borve.

    *Not really, for the benefit of credulous readers of social media.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,253
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Just as not all Jews support Netanyahu, so not all Hindus support Modi.

    That's a pretty crass generalisation.
    I was referring specifically to the Hindus causing trouble in Leicester, as was being referred to in the previous post.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,419

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster

    It is true that there remain serious divisions between Catholic and Protestant communities in Scotland but the violence these days is far less pronounced than it was - even at Old Firm games.

    Parts of Scotland: things have moved on.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    Who are the far right in Leicester -Hindus or Muslims ?
    Modi is a fascist. So probably the Hindus.
    Just as not all Jews support Netanyahu, so not all Hindus support Modi.

    That's a pretty crass generalisation.
    I was referring specifically to the Hindus causing trouble in Leicester, as was being referred to in the previous post.

    Just racism
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,473

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon, some on the right are acting like the crazed ex running in shouting "it should have been me".
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,462

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    That's the system. In the words of Sir Humphrey, this is a British democracy.
    Indeed it is, but the contention was that she represents Britain.

    She doesn't.
    Yes, she really does. Yvette Cooper might not be representative in the sense of being a typical Briton, whatever that means, but as Home Secretary, she does ex officio represent Britain.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon, some on the right are acting like the crazed ex running in shouting "it should have been me".
    Go on, I'll give you a second chance for a better retort
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,809
    viewcode said:

    Oh Gooodness, i forgot You Know My Name/Casino Royale

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnzgdBAKyJo

    My favourite
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    It’s the perception of two tier politics to go with two tier policing. The BAME riots in Harehills and Whitechapel (and many others before) didn’t get an emergency press conference and PM Starmer all pink faced and angry and saying he will horse whip the thugs
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    I am pleased we have someone in charge who has the freedom to unequivocally condemn far-right violence and doesn't feel he needs to second guess Nigel Farage's reactions because he is fishing in the same pool for votes. But each to our own.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon, some on the right are acting like the crazed ex running in shouting "it should have been me".
    Is this meant to be some kind of witticism? Or a new form of deliberate cringe?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,008

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.

    I haven't seen Sunak or Cleverly say anything to excuse the riots and they are Tory leader and Shadow Home Secretary. Some EDL types may have voted for Boris but they prefer Farage and even more Tommy Robinson
  • Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    One rule for one lot of race rioters. Another rule for another lot.

    7th June 2020.

    [Wikipedia] In London, BLM protesters clashed with police. A protester was seen climbing onto The Cenotaph war memorial and attempted to set the Union Jack on fire.[102] The words "was a racist" were painted onto a statue of Sir Winston Churchill."

    "A crowd of at least 5,000 people marched from Bristol's College Green to The Centre where they tore down the statue, dragged and dumped it into Bristol Harbour.[106][107] The empty plinth was used as a stage for protesters"

    9th June 2020.

    @keirstarmer We kneel with all those opposing anti-Black racism. #BlackLivesMatter

    https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1270374388488167428.

    Note the word "All"
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,246
    I see Duncan Scott won his eighth Olympic medal in the swimming medley yesterday. The most medals ever for Scottish Olympian and second most for the UK.

    In Scotland you always know someone who knows someone. By all accounts a really nice man, as I think many athletes are, despite being very competitive obviously.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,313

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    One rule for one lot of race rioters. Another rule for another lot.

    7th June 2020.

    [Wikipedia] In London, BLM protesters clashed with police. A protester was seen climbing onto The Cenotaph war memorial and attempted to set the Union Jack on fire.[102] The words "was a racist" were painted onto a statue of Sir Winston Churchill."

    "A crowd of at least 5,000 people marched from Bristol's College Green to The Centre where they tore down the statue, dragged and dumped it into Bristol Harbour.[106][107] The empty plinth was used as a stage for protesters"

    9th June 2020.

    @keirstarmer We kneel with all those opposing anti-Black racism. #BlackLivesMatter

    https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1270374388488167428.

    Note the word "All"
    7th June 2020: “27 police officers injured during largely peaceful anti-racism protests in London”

    https://x.com/bbcnews/status/1269574979680702470
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,170
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster
    Things are worse in Wick than I thought.
    Did you see the rioting* in Hawick the other day? And it's all kicking off* in Fivepenny Borve.

    *Not really, for the benefit of credulous readers of social media.
    We need to hear from someone with real experience of the dark side of Scotland.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    One thing that is interesting is the apparent inability of the left-liberal 'blob' to address Giorgia Meloni. Isn't she an actual fascist? They are literally taking away the rights of same sex parents to raise children. How is this even possible - isn't this against the ECHR ? Where are the mass protests outside the Italian embassy?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    It’s the perception of two tier politics to go with two tier policing. The BAME riots in Harehills and Whitechapel (and many others before) didn’t get an emergency press conference and PM Starmer all pink faced and angry and saying he will horse whip the thugs

    Starmer was reacting to concerted attempts by far-right groups to whip up violence in multiple locations on the back of the murders of three innocent girls. I do not think that is unreasonable. I guess we will have to disagree.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    I am pleased we have someone in charge who has the freedom to unequivocally condemn far-right violence and doesn't feel he needs to second guess Nigel Farage's reactions because he is fishing in the same pool for votes. But each to our own.

    Starmer - it's not going well is it ?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,165
    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.
    Yes, there is a strong resemblance to the Jan 6th mob. Attacking police, and refusing to accept that the majority voted against their hateful world view.

    I despise the EDL and it's splinter groups.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    One rule for one lot of race rioters. Another rule for another lot.

    7th June 2020.

    [Wikipedia] In London, BLM protesters clashed with police. A protester was seen climbing onto The Cenotaph war memorial and attempted to set the Union Jack on fire.[102] The words "was a racist" were painted onto a statue of Sir Winston Churchill."

    "A crowd of at least 5,000 people marched from Bristol's College Green to The Centre where they tore down the statue, dragged and dumped it into Bristol Harbour.[106][107] The empty plinth was used as a stage for protesters"

    9th June 2020.

    @keirstarmer We kneel with all those opposing anti-Black racism. #BlackLivesMatter

    https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1270374388488167428.

    Note the word "All"
    Exactly. The hypocrisy is repulsive

    And I personally witnessed the BLM protests in Whitehall. They were basically black lynch mobs hoping to kill anyone who looked white and a bit EDL-ish - brutally violent

    It is incredible no one died. Sheer luck, I think
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,246
    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.

    I haven't seen Sunak or Cleverly say anything to excuse the riots and they are Tory leader and Shadow Home Secretary. Some EDL types may have voted for Boris but they prefer Farage and even more Tommy Robinson
    Indeed. Cleverly said the right thing about the riots; Badenoch the wrong thing. It is very straightforward.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    It’s the perception of two tier politics to go with two tier policing. The BAME riots in Harehills and Whitechapel (and many others before) didn’t get an emergency press conference and PM Starmer all pink faced and angry and saying he will horse whip the thugs

    Starmer was reacting to concerted attempts by far-right groups to whip up violence in multiple locations on the back of the murders of three innocent girls. I do not think that is unreasonable. I guess we will have to disagree.

    You should give him his full name, Sir Kir “I take the knee for violent Marxist racists like BLM” Starmer, first Lord of the treasury
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    Foxy said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.
    Yes, there is a strong resemblance to the Jan 6th mob. Attacking police, and refusing to accept that the majority voted against their hateful world view.

    I despise the EDL and it's splinter groups.
    Since youre on how big a pay rise are GPs asking for and why ?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    I am pleased we have someone in charge who has the freedom to unequivocally condemn far-right violence and doesn't feel he needs to second guess Nigel Farage's reactions because he is fishing in the same pool for votes. But each to our own.

    Starmer - it's not going well is it ?

    It's going fine. Your reaction is as predictable as mine.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.

    I haven't seen Sunak or Cleverly say anything to excuse the riots and they are Tory leader and Shadow Home Secretary. Some EDL types may have voted for Boris but they prefer Farage and even more Tommy Robinson
    Indeed. Cleverly said the right thing about the riots; Badenoch the wrong thing. It is very straightforward.



    Has Sunak said anything?

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,170
    edited August 3

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster

    It is true that there remain serious divisions between Catholic and Protestant communities in Scotland but the violence these days is far less pronounced than it was - even at Old Firm games.

    I’d say banning away fans at Old Firm fixtures last season probably helped in violence reduction at OF games
  • Brompton said:

    pm215 said:

    Brompton said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    LIVE: Secret Service gives statement on Donald Trump shooting
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie6vymZpXuY

    Interesting that one factor identified is different agencies being on their own radio networks. This issue of inter-agency communication (and the lack of it) has also been a factor in this country, for instance the Ariana Grande concert bombing.
    I just don’t buy this. Not only was the shooter the only 20 year old in America with literally zero internet presence - and no motivation? - but it turns out his home is as “clean as a lab”. Not a speck of evidence either way or anything. A 20 year old guy with a home as “clean as a lab”?

    The whole thing is exceptionally suspicious

    And, for clarity, I’ve no idea who recruited him or why or how or anything, but I feel pretty sure this is not the whole story
    Its fairly obvious who recruited him. He was described as dangerously inaccurate by his schook rifle club. The only people likely to recruit him is the people being shot at.
    They recruited him because they knew his shooting was so poor the best he could do was hit Trump's ear?
    The TDS explanation for the shooting is the most deranged thing I’ve ever heard. And I have heard otherwise intelligent people espouse it irl. ThT Trump staged a shooting by a loser kid, to just miss his head, in order to win sympathy votes. I mean really. I wouldn’t trust that Turkish Olympic gangsta shooter to just graze my ear from 150m, yet alone some incel kid thrown out his high school shooting team.
    Unlike you to snub a ludicrous conspiracy theory. It'll be confused and a little hurt.
    You should look up the origin of the phrase “conspiracy theory”. It might be informative for how you assess the information you’re presented.
    Yes happy to do that. I like my assessment technique but there's always room for betterment.
    “Conspiracy theory” is essentially a catch all term to discredit any narrative that is inconvenient if believed more widely. We’ve seen a number of “conspiracy theories” eventually validated over the years. There tends to be a common denominator that it’s US 3 letter agencies that end up looking bad.
    And we've seen far, far more convincingly disproved: pizzagate, every aspect of QAnon, COVID-19 vaccine dangers, flat Earth, chemtrails, crisis actors, the Oklahoma City bombing and the 2004 Madrid train bombings being false flag operations, ditto the Las Vegas shooting, 9/11 being an inside job or Jews have warning of it, Obama not being born in the US, Michelle Obama being a man, the Trump assassination attempt being the Dems, the Southport knife attacker being a Muslim immigrant, etc. etc. etc. etc.
    Conversely, every miscarriage of justice case in the UK is a conspiracy theory until it isn't. Ho ho, are you seriously claiming that the most scrupulously just criminal law courts in the world, assisted by incredibly talented barristers and clever expert witnesses, and with multiple layers of appeal to judges of ever increasing learnedness, wrongly convicted Christie and the Birmingham six and Hallam and Nealon and Malkinson and nearly 1,000 subpostmasters? And a thousand others you can Google for yourself? I mean between their conviction and their exoneration, how does the theory that they are innocent not count as a conspiracy theory?

    Helpful hint: the best way of deciding whether a theory is true or not, is to examine the evidence for and against it. Popping up a level and saying This is a type X theory and type X theories tend to be T or F is a lazy get out. Especially so when X is ill defined and can often be a cover for Theories I happen to think are T or F and I want a nice blanket put down of.
    The problem with that is that the people who love to spread conspiracy theories can generate theories really quite profusely, much more easily than a random person can do investigations of the evidence for each one. So the "lazy get out" (or "practical way to avoid wasting too much time on rubbish") is important. For instance, a
    random theory off social media is not likely worth my time to think about; a suggestion of a miscarriage of justice raised by Private Eye or Computer Weekly is at minimum best not dismissed out of hand. And a theory which requires a massive conspiracy among many people in prominent positions is unlikely to be true.
    The post office fuckup falsifies your final sentence so conclusively that it's hard to imagine how you managed to type it.
    Has it been proved that the post office was a conspiracy?

    Rather than a lot of weak people who were in positions above their capabilities doing what was easiest and most convenient for them personally?
    The PO Inquiry has finished taking evidence, so now is a good time to pause and reflect on where we are.

    It was indeed a very broad conspiracy spreading over more than twenty years, and worsening as time went on. It covered all ranks, from the most junior investigators through to the most senior managers and Board Members. Numerous consultants, lawyers (internal and external), civil servants and Ministers were also implicated. The legal profession comes out of it particularly badly.

    The charges could fall on hundreds, if not thousands, but this would probably be a mistake because if the net is spread too wide, legal proceedings become unwieldy and impractical. Far better to focus on the clearly defineable conspiracies, of which there are plenty.

    I suspect and hope that the CPS will focus on the Clark letter, which was delivered to the PO's chief Counsel at the time, Susan Crichton. It should have gone straight to the Board via the CEO (Vennells) and Chairman (Perkins). Why it did not is disputed and unclear, and it seems to me that this is a suitable matter for a jury to decide.

    The strongest other candidates for prosecution would include former chairman Tim Parker, head of security John Scott, Vennell's gopher Angela van den Bogern, hapless civil servant Richard Callard, and Fujitsu stooges Andy Dunk and Gareth Jenkins (who has virtually confessed anyway.)

    The legal bods may well be left to the Law Society, although one would hope that it would administer more than the usual mild slap on the wrist. Its problem would be that the transagressions were committed by a very wide range of the profession's members - from the risible Jarnail Singh to eminent KCs such as Altman and Grabiner, whose disastrously unwise advice to the PO threatened to derail the whole process of uncovering what has rightly been described as the biggest miscarriage of justice in British history.

    Btw, this Site's leading authority on the subject, Ms Cyclefree, is currently writing a book on this and other public scandals. This partly explains her absence. Should be a good read.
    "It was indeed a very broad conspiracy spreading over more than twenty years,"

    Was it a single conspiracy, or a multitude of cover-your-backside conspiracies and individual lies? I haven't been watching the inquiry as closely as I perhaps should, but my impression is that, for much of the time, there was no overarching conspiracy; just people lying to themselves and their superiors, and superiors lying to their superiors and underlings. A series of lies by individuals (not conspiracies), and conspiracies involving a handful of people.

    If there was an overlying conspiracy, it came later when the sh*t really started to hit the fan for the PO.

    Is there any validity in that view?
    It is what happens when it is realised that (1) admitting it has gone wrong is life changing for all concerned (2) the issues involve complex technology that few understand.

    There have been some similar scandals involving fingerprinting and rogue experts in past years.

    At the root of it is courts basically assuming experts are correct unless proven otherwise.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    If this is Starmer's honeymoon period, I dread to think what will follow

    I am pleased we have someone in charge who has the freedom to unequivocally condemn far-right violence and doesn't feel he needs to second guess Nigel Farage's reactions because he is fishing in the same pool for votes. But each to our own.

    Starmer - it's not going well is it ?

    It's going fine. Your reaction is as predictable as mine.

    chortle - well old habits die hard :smiley:
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    It’s the perception of two tier politics to go with two tier policing. The BAME riots in Harehills and Whitechapel (and many others before) didn’t get an emergency press conference and PM Starmer all pink faced and angry and saying he will horse whip the thugs

    Starmer was reacting to concerted attempts by far-right groups to whip up violence in multiple locations on the back of the murders of three innocent girls. I do not think that is unreasonable. I guess we will have to disagree.

    You should give him his full name, Sir Kir “I take the knee for violent Marxist racists like BLM” Starmer, first Lord of the treasury

    I'll stick with the shorthand. It's easier.

    You need more sleep!

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    My point was that left-liberals are very comfortable attacking the far-right, and only that. They easily fall into the trap of bracketing up all opposition and concern into that category.

    And, their thinking goes no further.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,984

    NEW THREAD

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    Leon said:

    1. The riots are stupid, ugly, dangerous and they should stop

    2. It’s amazing no one rioted sooner - 100,000+ underage white British girls raped by grooming gangs - not a peep. Til now

    3. Riots are - sometimes - an expression of political will when all other avenues are exhausted. The British people have made it abundantly clear they want to reduce immigration and stop the boats, they don’t want their country concreted over for 500,000 migrants a year, they don’t want their hospitals overwhelmed, they don’t want their taxes to go up to pay £10bn a year to put boat people in hotels. And yet every government ignores this expressed will and does nothing or makes it worse. So in the end people riot as voting does not work

    Yes, we could pretend that this is all very new and pissed up young men have never grouped together under the slimmest of pretexts to smash up our towns and cities before.

    You need to do more hard thinking and have better answers than just the easy one of pissed up young men.

    I hope you're capable of that.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713
    Leon said:

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes exactly. And 17,000 so far this year

    I predicted the Starmer government could implode quite quickly over migration/asylum/boats

    It may happen even quicker than I thought. Because they have absolutely no idea what to do about any of this, and their natural instincts are to let in even more people - even as the mood of the country swings firmly against any almost form of immigration

    Seriously, what is their plan for the boats? A “border command task force”. It’s risible bureaucratic nonsense and it’s being exposed cruelly and speedily
    Well, I did warn you.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited August 3

    Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    One rule for one lot of race rioters. Another rule for another lot.

    7th June 2020.

    [Wikipedia] In London, BLM protesters clashed with police. A protester was seen climbing onto The Cenotaph war memorial and attempted to set the Union Jack on fire.[102] The words "was a racist" were painted onto a statue of Sir Winston Churchill."

    "A crowd of at least 5,000 people marched from Bristol's College Green to The Centre where they tore down the statue, dragged and dumped it into Bristol Harbour.[106][107] The empty plinth was used as a stage for protesters"

    9th June 2020.

    @keirstarmer We kneel with all those opposing anti-Black racism. #BlackLivesMatter

    https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1270374388488167428.

    Note the word "All"

    8th June 2020 - Keir Starmer: pulling down Edward Colston statue was wrong

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/08/keir-starmer-edward-colston-bristol-statue-wrong



  • Foxy said:

    Race riots on the streets of Britain being stirred up by right wing thugs and social media, with Reform MPs and the usual suspects acting as their apologists.

    Shameful.

    One rule for one lot of race rioters. Another rule for another lot.

    7th June 2020.

    [Wikipedia] In London, BLM protesters clashed with police. A protester was seen climbing onto The Cenotaph war memorial and attempted to set the Union Jack on fire.[102] The words "was a racist" were painted onto a statue of Sir Winston Churchill."

    "A crowd of at least 5,000 people marched from Bristol's College Green to The Centre where they tore down the statue, dragged and dumped it into Bristol Harbour.[106][107] The empty plinth was used as a stage for protesters"

    9th June 2020.

    @keirstarmer We kneel with all those opposing anti-Black racism. #BlackLivesMatter

    https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1270374388488167428.

    Note the word "All"
    7th June 2020: “27 police officers injured during largely peaceful anti-racism protests in London”

    https://x.com/bbcnews/status/1269574979680702470
    QED
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes. All Labour's fault. If only we'd had the good sense to reelect the Conservatives, it would have been down to a handful.
    Rwanda was starting to act as deterrent. Just look at how upset the Irish got about the effects of that.

    Now, it's open season.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 715
    Foxy said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.
    Yes, there is a strong resemblance to the Jan 6th mob. Attacking police, and refusing to accept that the majority voted against their hateful world view.

    I despise the EDL and it's splinter groups.
    The resemblance stops quite sharply, there is no support tacit or otherwise from those who lost office a month ago. Conservatives dont support direct action like this, those that participated are unlikely to normally vote, and if they do unlikely to be conservative.
    I just read a tweet in which Pretti Patel absolutely condemns it, without throat clearing without pausing. Maybe some need to look back on the throat clearing we had only a short time ago when it kicked off.
    Two Tier Keir.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited August 3

    Leon said:

    1. The riots are stupid, ugly, dangerous and they should stop

    2. It’s amazing no one rioted sooner - 100,000+ underage white British girls raped by grooming gangs - not a peep. Til now

    3. Riots are - sometimes - an expression of political will when all other avenues are exhausted. The British people have made it abundantly clear they want to reduce immigration and stop the boats, they don’t want their country concreted over for 500,000 migrants a year, they don’t want their hospitals overwhelmed, they don’t want their taxes to go up to pay £10bn a year to put boat people in hotels. And yet every government ignores this expressed will and does nothing or makes it worse. So in the end people riot as voting does not work

    Yes, we could pretend that this is all very new and pissed up young men have never grouped together under the slimmest of pretexts to smash up our towns and cities before.

    You need to do more hard thinking and have better answers than just the easy one of pissed up young men.

    I hope you're capable of that.

    I'm capable of seeing something that has been happening in English towns and cities for decades, if not for centuries.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    That's the system. In the words of Sir Humphrey, this is a British democracy.
    Indeed it is, but the contention was that she represents Britain.

    She doesn't.
    She is Home Secretary. She represents Britain. If less than half of people voted for her that is irrelevant. We have never required a majority of the popular vote of our representatives, nor Monarchy nor Church for that matter.
    Sorry, just because she's in elected office doesn't mean she speaks for the country.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    I am not actually saying they are wrong to condemn the protests. The criticism is of the political strategy.

    What I would observe is this: 'Condemning the far right' is all they can come up with. They avoid discussing any of the underlying problems. But actually, what this risks creating is a kind of reactive dynamic that emboldens the 'far right'.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    Leon said:

    1. The riots are stupid, ugly, dangerous and they should stop

    2. It’s amazing no one rioted sooner - 100,000+ underage white British girls raped by grooming gangs - not a peep. Til now

    3. Riots are - sometimes - an expression of political will when all other avenues are exhausted. The British people have made it abundantly clear they want to reduce immigration and stop the boats, they don’t want their country concreted over for 500,000 migrants a year, they don’t want their hospitals overwhelmed, they don’t want their taxes to go up to pay £10bn a year to put boat people in hotels. And yet every government ignores this expressed will and does nothing or makes it worse. So in the end people riot as voting does not work

    Yes, we could pretend that this is all very new and pissed up young men have never grouped together under the slimmest of pretexts to smash up our towns and cities before.

    You need to do more hard thinking and have better answers than just the easy one of pissed up young men.

    I hope you're capable of that.

    I'm capable of seeing something that has been happening in English towns and cities for decades, if not for centuries.

    You're not.

    Bit sad, really.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    I am not actually saying they are wrong to condemn the protests. The criticism is of the political strategy.

    What I would observe is this: 'Condemning the far right' is all they can come up with. They avoid discussing any of the underlying problems. But actually, what this risks creating is a kind of reactive dynamic that emboldens the 'far right'.

    The refusal to equate far-right violence with legitimate concerns peaceful people have with levels of immigration seems entirely right to me.

  • TresTres Posts: 2,724
    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    It’s the perception of two tier politics to go with two tier policing. The BAME riots in Harehills and Whitechapel (and many others before) didn’t get an emergency press conference and PM Starmer all pink faced and angry and saying he will horse whip the thugs
    wah wah it's not fair, you're such a child
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672

    Leon said:

    1. The riots are stupid, ugly, dangerous and they should stop

    2. It’s amazing no one rioted sooner - 100,000+ underage white British girls raped by grooming gangs - not a peep. Til now

    3. Riots are - sometimes - an expression of political will when all other avenues are exhausted. The British people have made it abundantly clear they want to reduce immigration and stop the boats, they don’t want their country concreted over for 500,000 migrants a year, they don’t want their hospitals overwhelmed, they don’t want their taxes to go up to pay £10bn a year to put boat people in hotels. And yet every government ignores this expressed will and does nothing or makes it worse. So in the end people riot as voting does not work

    Yes, we could pretend that this is all very new and pissed up young men have never grouped together under the slimmest of pretexts to smash up our towns and cities before.

    You need to do more hard thinking and have better answers than just the easy one of pissed up young men.

    I hope you're capable of that.

    I'm capable of seeing something that has been happening in English towns and cities for decades, if not for centuries.

    You're not.

    Bit sad, really.

    Yes, I am. You are a one-eyed partisan. Easy, isn't it?

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713
    darkage said:

    One thing that is interesting is the apparent inability of the left-liberal 'blob' to address Giorgia Meloni. Isn't she an actual fascist? They are literally taking away the rights of same sex parents to raise children. How is this even possible - isn't this against the ECHR ? Where are the mass protests outside the Italian embassy?

    Because the left-liberal blob don't really give a shit what happens in Europe, and are highly Anglo-American in perspective which is where their political and cultural focus is centred.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited August 3

    darkage said:

    One thing that is interesting is the apparent inability of the left-liberal 'blob' to address Giorgia Meloni. Isn't she an actual fascist? They are literally taking away the rights of same sex parents to raise children. How is this even possible - isn't this against the ECHR ? Where are the mass protests outside the Italian embassy?

    Because the left-liberal blob don't really give a shit what happens in Europe, and are highly Anglo-American in perspective which is where their political and cultural focus is centred.

    The left-liberal blob!!!!!! Meanwhile, failed Tory politicians and Nigel Farage hurry across the Atlantic to tell the GOP how brilliant Trump is to earn some extra cash.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    Andy_JS said:

    "Yvette Cooper
    @YvetteCooperMP

    Criminals attacking the police & stoking disorder on our streets will pay the price for their violence & thuggery.

    The police have the full backing of Government to take the strongest possible action & ensure they face the full force of the law.

    They do not represent Britain.

    10:12 PM · Aug 2, 2024"

    https://x.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1819481345405358209

    Neither does she.
    You've not got the hang of this winning an election business.
    You've not got the hang of this 33.7% of the vote on a 59% turnout business.
    That's the system. In the words of Sir Humphrey, this is a British democracy.
    Indeed it is, but the contention was that she represents Britain.

    She doesn't.
    Yes, she really does. Yvette Cooper might not be representative in the sense of being a typical Briton, whatever that means, but as Home Secretary, she does ex officio represent Britain.
    Weak. Changing the goalposts so you can try and win the point.

    You could say the same about David Lammy when he represents Britain abroad as foreign secretary. Still doesn't mean he personally channels the zeitgeist of what British people are thinking, and gets it right.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,955
    edited August 3
    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.

    I haven't seen Sunak or Cleverly say anything to excuse the riots and they are Tory leader and Shadow Home Secretary. Some EDL types may have voted for Boris but they prefer Farage and even more Tommy Robinson
    Indeed. Cleverly said the right thing about the riots; Badenoch the wrong thing. It is very straightforward.


    Good from Cleverly.

    I'm watching for whether Reform MPs continue their baiting. How far will that group go? Lee Anderson's behaviour is not encouraging.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    No-one is cheering the riots or saying we shouldn't condemn them.

    You need to read up on what your hero Tony Blair said on the subject. You might listen to him rather than "The Blues" who trigger the brainstem in you.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited August 3

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    No-one is cheering the riots or saying we shouldn't condemn them.

    You need to read up on what your hero Tony Blair said on the subject. You might listen to him rather than "The Blues" who trigger the brainstem in you.

    Tony Blair is not my hero. But I guess all "Reds" look the same to you. Such is your deeply partisan approach to politics.

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885
    viewcode said:

    Speaking of For Your Eyes Only, what's everyone's favourite Bond theme. I think mine is Licence to Kill, but I've had a slight soft spot for Moonraker in recent times. I think because it's basically the same orchestration as John Barry's Out of Africa theme tune.

    If by "theme" you mean the bit of music over the credits, then my fave is Goldeneye, although I have good things to say about Live and Let Die, The Spy Who Loved Me, View To A Kill, and Spyfall.

    If you mean "pieces of music in the soundtrack", then "Bond77" from TSWLM is probably the best, but some of the bits from Moonraker, YOLT, and Goldeneye are also good
    Great pick! I love the Goldeneye theme. Even though Shirley Bassey famously said 'She hasn't got the range' about Tina Turner's excellent performance. :lol:
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    No-one is cheering the riots or saying we shouldn't condemn them.

    You need to read up on what your hero Tony Blair said on the subject. You might listen to him rather than "The Blues" who trigger the brainstem in you.

    Tony Blair is not my hero. But I guess all "Reds" look the same to you. Such is your deeply partisan approach to politics.

    Err. No.

    You're the partisan one.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,713

    darkage said:

    One thing that is interesting is the apparent inability of the left-liberal 'blob' to address Giorgia Meloni. Isn't she an actual fascist? They are literally taking away the rights of same sex parents to raise children. How is this even possible - isn't this against the ECHR ? Where are the mass protests outside the Italian embassy?

    Because the left-liberal blob don't really give a shit what happens in Europe, and are highly Anglo-American in perspective which is where their political and cultural focus is centred.

    The left-liberal blob!!!!!! Meanwhile, failed Tory politicians and Nigel Farage hurry across the Atlantic to tell the GOP how brilliant Trump is to earn some extra cash.

    Your slightly insecure hyperventilating on here this morning is slightly telling.

    Secretly, you're worried you might not have got something right here.

    Interesting.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672

    darkage said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.

    Yes, they are not taking it well. I did say before the election that even though you are prepared for defeat it always hits you much much harder once it has happened. I guess if you are not used to losing it hits even harder than that. But, even so, you'd have though that supporters of the party of law and order would, er, support law and order. But clearly there are caveats.


    The point being made isn't making any judgement about the protests. It is just saying that the reaction from the labour party and the 'MSM' is counterproductive in political terms and is likely to actually embolden the 'far right'.

    A lot of people come on to this website wanting to have a discussion forum where they all agree with each other, going around in a comfortable circuit...

    'riots.... far right.... bad .... terrible.... amazing that posters coming on here making excuses for it.... they must be russian trolls.... they need to be banned... we are on the right side of history! "

    I am disagreeing with you. I am doing what you want. So tell me why I am wrong. Why was the Labour government wrong to condemn violent demonstrations being organised by the far-right?

    No-one is cheering the riots or saying we shouldn't condemn them.

    You need to read up on what your hero Tony Blair said on the subject. You might listen to him rather than "The Blues" who trigger the brainstem in you.

    Tony Blair is not my hero. But I guess all "Reds" look the same to you. Such is your deeply partisan approach to politics.

    Err. No.

    You're the partisan one.

    No, you are.

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885
    edited August 3
    ..

    *Edited - there was an inelegant comment about trends in migration that I'd need to be awake to think about so I canned it.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672

    darkage said:

    One thing that is interesting is the apparent inability of the left-liberal 'blob' to address Giorgia Meloni. Isn't she an actual fascist? They are literally taking away the rights of same sex parents to raise children. How is this even possible - isn't this against the ECHR ? Where are the mass protests outside the Italian embassy?

    Because the left-liberal blob don't really give a shit what happens in Europe, and are highly Anglo-American in perspective which is where their political and cultural focus is centred.

    The left-liberal blob!!!!!! Meanwhile, failed Tory politicians and Nigel Farage hurry across the Atlantic to tell the GOP how brilliant Trump is to earn some extra cash.

    Your slightly insecure hyperventilating on here this morning is slightly telling.

    Secretly, you're worried you might not have got something right here.

    Interesting.

    I think you should keep telling yourself that. It means you do not have to ask yourself any hard questions and it makes you happy. That is a good thing. Anything that restrains the terrible rage we see on here from you so often is to be welcomed.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,165

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    My point was that left-liberals are very comfortable attacking the far-right, and only that. They easily fall into the trap of bracketing up all opposition and concern into that category.

    And, their thinking goes no further.
    Wrong again. I supported the police and social workers in their child protection measures in Leeds.

    It was the right wingers against.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,936
    ...

    darkage said:

    One thing that is interesting is the apparent inability of the left-liberal 'blob' to address Giorgia Meloni. Isn't she an actual fascist? They are literally taking away the rights of same sex parents to raise children. How is this even possible - isn't this against the ECHR ? Where are the mass protests outside the Italian embassy?

    Because the left-liberal blob don't really give a shit what happens in Europe, and are highly Anglo-American in perspective which is where their political and cultural focus is centred.

    The left-liberal blob!!!!!! Meanwhile, failed Tory politicians and Nigel Farage hurry across the Atlantic to tell the GOP how brilliant Trump is to earn some extra cash.

    Your slightly insecure hyperventilating on here this morning is slightly telling.

    Secretly, you're worried you might not have got something right here.

    Interesting.
    Pots and kettles Casino. Pots and kettles.

    You need another hobby. Have you thought about getting a dog? It might work for the Field Marshal too.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,689
    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    LIVE: Secret Service gives statement on Donald Trump shooting
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie6vymZpXuY

    Interesting that one factor identified is different agencies being on their own radio networks. This issue of inter-agency communication (and the lack of it) has also been a factor in this country, for instance the Ariana Grande concert bombing.
    I just don’t buy this. Not only was the shooter the only 20 year old in America with literally zero internet presence - and no motivation? - but it turns out his home is as “clean as a lab”. Not a speck of evidence either way or anything. A 20 year old guy with a home as “clean as a lab”?

    The whole thing is exceptionally suspicious

    And, for clarity, I’ve no idea who recruited him or why or how or anything, but I feel pretty sure this is not the whole story
    Its fairly obvious who recruited him. He was described as dangerously inaccurate by his schook rifle club. The only people likely to recruit him is the people being shot at.
    They recruited him because they knew his shooting was so poor the best he could do was hit Trump's ear?
    The TDS explanation for the shooting is the most deranged thing I’ve ever heard. And I have heard otherwise intelligent people espouse it irl. ThT Trump staged a shooting by a loser kid, to just miss his head, in order to win sympathy votes. I mean really. I wouldn’t trust that Turkish Olympic gangsta shooter to just graze my ear from 150m, yet alone some incel kid thrown out his high school shooting team.
    Unlike you to snub a ludicrous conspiracy theory. It'll be confused and a little hurt.
    You should look up the origin of the phrase “conspiracy theory”. It might be informative for how you assess the information you’re presented.
    Yes happy to do that. I like my assessment technique but there's always room for betterment.
    “Conspiracy theory” is essentially a catch all term to discredit any narrative that is inconvenient if believed more widely. We’ve seen a number of “conspiracy theories” eventually validated over the years. There tends to be a common denominator that it’s US 3 letter agencies that end up looking bad.
    That sounds like another conspiracy theory.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    I see Kemi Badenoch has a big splash on the Telegraph front page saying the riots, which she describes as "tension", is the fault of the cultural establishment pretending integration hasn't failed.

    I'm sorry. It's the thugs that need to integrate, not their victims who are minding their own business. Badenoch is not fit to be a leader.

    Have you been to northern Britain? Integration has failed. Multiculturalism is a disaster
    Things are worse in Wick than I thought.
    Did you see the rioting* in Hawick the other day? And it's all kicking off* in Fivepenny Borve.

    *Not really, for the benefit of credulous readers of social media.
    The only thing I could imagine causing a riot in Hawick, would be the rugby club running out of beer.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,049
    Foxy said:

    TimS said:

    darkage said:


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.


    Sam Freedman
    @Samfr
    ·
    15m
    Apart from anything it's incredibly bad politics for Farage and his adviser Goodwin to associate their brand with rioting thugs.

    It's also incredibly bad politics for Starmer and Cooper to go full Anti-Racist on them, which was and is entirely predictable, and highlight how heavily they'll have their collars felt without thinking - as Blair does - why some of the sentiments that lie behind this might have come about.

    Lots of politicians misplaying this.
    It isn't surprising that the labour party and the 'msm blob' settled on blaming the 'far right', quite comfortable and predictable ground, but then they end up branding everyone who thinks they are protesting against the slaughter of innocent children as a 'far right terrorist', therefore increasing the appeal of the 'far right', whilst reinforcing a perception that there was an establishment conspiracy regarding a cover up of the original event.

    Yep, all entirely predictable. But they're all very comfortable with playing that game.

    It's what they know, it's what they like to do, and it's what they'll be applauded for in their social and professional circles.

    Labour made the man tattooed in swastikas join the balaklavaed looters in Sunderland to target ethnic minorities and burn down a police station. And you accuse others of football team politics. Hilarious!
    This is all becoming rather January 6th. Elite right wingers excusing or even condoning violent thuggery because they’re peeved about the election.
    Yes, there is a strong resemblance to the Jan 6th mob. Attacking police, and refusing to accept that the majority voted against their hateful world view.

    I despise the EDL and it's splinter groups.
    The EDL does not exist

    The majority voted against a labour govt.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,173

    Brompton said:

    pm215 said:

    Brompton said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    kinabalu said:

    moonshine said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    LIVE: Secret Service gives statement on Donald Trump shooting
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie6vymZpXuY

    Interesting that one factor identified is different agencies being on their own radio networks. This issue of inter-agency communication (and the lack of it) has also been a factor in this country, for instance the Ariana Grande concert bombing.
    I just don’t buy this. Not only was the shooter the only 20 year old in America with literally zero internet presence - and no motivation? - but it turns out his home is as “clean as a lab”. Not a speck of evidence either way or anything. A 20 year old guy with a home as “clean as a lab”?

    The whole thing is exceptionally suspicious

    And, for clarity, I’ve no idea who recruited him or why or how or anything, but I feel pretty sure this is not the whole story
    Its fairly obvious who recruited him. He was described as dangerously inaccurate by his schook rifle club. The only people likely to recruit him is the people being shot at.
    They recruited him because they knew his shooting was so poor the best he could do was hit Trump's ear?
    The TDS explanation for the shooting is the most deranged thing I’ve ever heard. And I have heard otherwise intelligent people espouse it irl. ThT Trump staged a shooting by a loser kid, to just miss his head, in order to win sympathy votes. I mean really. I wouldn’t trust that Turkish Olympic gangsta shooter to just graze my ear from 150m, yet alone some incel kid thrown out his high school shooting team.
    Unlike you to snub a ludicrous conspiracy theory. It'll be confused and a little hurt.
    You should look up the origin of the phrase “conspiracy theory”. It might be informative for how you assess the information you’re presented.
    Yes happy to do that. I like my assessment technique but there's always room for betterment.
    “Conspiracy theory” is essentially a catch all term to discredit any narrative that is inconvenient if believed more widely. We’ve seen a number of “conspiracy theories” eventually validated over the years. There tends to be a common denominator that it’s US 3 letter agencies that end up looking bad.
    And we've seen far, far more convincingly disproved: pizzagate, every aspect of QAnon, COVID-19 vaccine dangers, flat Earth, chemtrails, crisis actors, the Oklahoma City bombing and the 2004 Madrid train bombings being false flag operations, ditto the Las Vegas shooting, 9/11 being an inside job or Jews have warning of it, Obama not being born in the US, Michelle Obama being a man, the Trump assassination attempt being the Dems, the Southport knife attacker being a Muslim immigrant, etc. etc. etc. etc.
    Conversely, every miscarriage of justice case in the UK is a conspiracy theory until it isn't. Ho ho, are you seriously claiming that the most scrupulously just criminal law courts in the world, assisted by incredibly talented barristers and clever expert witnesses, and with multiple layers of appeal to judges of ever increasing learnedness, wrongly convicted Christie and the Birmingham six and Hallam and Nealon and Malkinson and nearly 1,000 subpostmasters? And a thousand others you can Google for yourself? I mean between their conviction and their exoneration, how does the theory that they are innocent not count as a conspiracy theory?

    Helpful hint: the best way of deciding whether a theory is true or not, is to examine the evidence for and against it. Popping up a level and saying This is a type X theory and type X theories tend to be T or F is a lazy get out. Especially so when X is ill defined and can often be a cover for Theories I happen to think are T or F and I want a nice blanket put down of.
    The problem with that is that the people who love to spread conspiracy theories can generate theories really quite profusely, much more easily than a random person can do investigations of the evidence for each one. So the "lazy get out" (or "practical way to avoid wasting too much time on rubbish") is important. For instance, a
    random theory off social media is not likely worth my time to think about; a suggestion of a miscarriage of justice raised by Private Eye or Computer Weekly is at minimum best not dismissed out of hand. And a theory which requires a massive conspiracy among many people in prominent positions is unlikely to be true.
    The post office fuckup falsifies your final sentence so conclusively that it's hard to imagine how you managed to type it.
    Has it been proved that the post office was a conspiracy?

    Rather than a lot of weak people who were in positions above their capabilities doing what was easiest and most convenient for them personally?
    The PO Inquiry has finished taking evidence, so now is a good time to pause and reflect on where we are.

    It was indeed a very broad conspiracy spreading over more than twenty years, and worsening as time went on. It covered all ranks, from the most junior investigators through to the most senior managers and Board Members. Numerous consultants, lawyers (internal and external), civil servants and Ministers were also implicated. The legal profession comes out of it particularly badly.

    The charges could fall on hundreds, if not thousands, but this would probably be a mistake because if the net is spread too wide, legal proceedings become unwieldy and impractical. Far better to focus on the clearly defineable conspiracies, of which there are plenty.

    I suspect and hope that the CPS will focus on the Clark letter, which was delivered to the PO's chief Counsel at the time, Susan Crichton. It should have gone straight to the Board via the CEO (Vennells) and Chairman (Perkins). Why it did not is disputed and unclear, and it seems to me that this is a suitable matter for a jury to decide.

    The strongest other candidates for prosecution would include former chairman Tim Parker, head of security John Scott, Vennell's gopher Angela van den Bogern, hapless civil servant Richard Callard, and Fujitsu stooges Andy Dunk and Gareth Jenkins (who has virtually confessed anyway.)

    The legal bods may well be left to the Law Society, although one would hope that it would administer more than the usual mild slap on the wrist. Its problem would be that the transagressions were committed by a very wide range of the profession's members - from the risible Jarnail Singh to eminent KCs such as Altman and Grabiner, whose disastrously unwise advice to the PO threatened to derail the whole process of uncovering what has rightly been described as the biggest miscarriage of justice in British history.

    Btw, this Site's leading authority on the subject, Ms Cyclefree, is currently writing a book on this and other public scandals. This partly explains her absence. Should be a good read.
    "It was indeed a very broad conspiracy spreading over more than twenty years,"

    Was it a single conspiracy, or a multitude of cover-your-backside conspiracies and individual lies? I haven't been watching the inquiry as closely as I perhaps should, but my impression is that, for much of the time, there was no overarching conspiracy; just people lying to themselves and their superiors, and superiors lying to their superiors and underlings. A series of lies by individuals (not conspiracies), and conspiracies involving a handful of people.

    If there was an overlying conspiracy, it came later when the sh*t really started to hit the fan for the PO.

    Is there any validity in that view?
    A lot of people kept their heads down - and have endeavoured to continue doing so - as no-one wanted to be the person stepping out of line. I don't think that can be described as a conspiracy per se. That a relatively small number of people knew, or should have known, the reality of the situation and acted differently is pretty clear, and the list of culprits is as PtP sets out.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,173
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    I also note that over 1,000 people crossed the channel last week, which many in the media aren't highlighting - presumably, because their favoured administration is now in office.

    Yes exactly. And 17,000 so far this year

    I predicted the Starmer government could implode quite quickly over migration/asylum/boats

    It may happen even quicker than I thought. Because they have absolutely no idea what to do about any of this, and their natural instincts are to let in even more people - even as the mood of the country swings firmly against any almost form of immigration

    Seriously, what is their plan for the boats? A “border command task force”. It’s risible bureaucratic nonsense and it’s being exposed cruelly and speedily
    Yes. All Labour’s fault. Nothing whatsoever to do with the good weather and favourable crossing conditions we’ve been having down here in Kent/Pas de Calais this week and last.

    People would take you and @Casino_Royale more seriously if you tried to analyse and question the issues rather than make this site a whinge fest for your mutual hobbyhorses and partisan hackery. Why not take the day off and join your mates setting fire to a police station for what are no doubt “valid concerns” about (ahem)”immigration”.

    The two of you moaning about the insidious “mainstream media” when one of you is embedded into it up to his neck is beyond parody.
    It's a shame Leon hasn't even got the intelligence to realise how stupid he is.
  • ArchvaldorArchvaldor Posts: 18

    System said:

    Liz Truss may have lost but she isn’t forgotten – politicalbetting.com

    This is incredible in several ways, not least of which that I don't think there is another former PM that could go entirely unrecognised through an interview.But also – mainly – because it results in the BEST IMPROVISED PUT DOWN/SEGUE EVER on television. ~SS pic.twitter.com/qsdLzRAuCa

    Read the full story here

    I know you’re a banker and all that @TheScreamingEagles but she crashed the markets, not the economy

    Not the same thing at all
    Most people would (except savers) regard the soaring interest rates that followed a form of crashing the economy. Her economic ineptitude was not the only reason, but the appearance of instability and incompetence helped damage confidence. Crashing the economy is a reasonable description for most of us.
    I beg to differ. Things like house prices are at abnormally high values and a return to affordability in the longer term is something most people would welcome. I'd see that as a correction rather than a crash.

    I don't accept the OBR or whatever as some kind of ultimate authority on financial competence. The UK has not done that well since it was brought into existence.
This discussion has been closed.