It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
I think many people suspect that the tribunals are abused. Migrants told to lose their paperwork by the people smugglers for instance and coached in the 'correct' claims to make to boost their chances. I have no idea if its true but you only need to see how some immigration lawyers fought over Rwanda to think it plausible.
I know some people who have been granted asylum - one in particular is a student on my course. I do not doubt his story. I do not believe all those crossing the Channel have the same tragic back story as he does.
Many people believe those seeking asylum are given houses and loads of dosh. Many people believe most immigrants are asylum seekers. People believe all sorts of things. If there’s actual evidence, I’d be interested to see that.
Well as the country is housing thousands (tens of thousands?) in hotels and presumably feeding and clothing them, I think its fair to say they are being given housing and money.
Its incredibly complex. People often talk at cross purposes about things. There is no doubt in my mind than many people using people smugglers to get to the UK are economic migrants. We should, in many ways, welcome enterprising people who are trying to make better lives for themselves. I am not someone who thinks they are coming for the free money - they are coming to try to work and improve their lives.
But I think resident populations have rights too - and their wishes are surely part of the equation?
The housing asylum seekers receive is a temporary room, maybe in a hotel, maybe in a floating converted prison barge. It’s very different to being given a house.
Asylum seekers are given some money. They are given, if I remember the proportions correctly, 80% of what someone on benefits gets. The amount someone on benefits gets is meant to be the minimum needed to live on. So we give people less than the minimum needed to live on. They are banned from working. I wouldn’t characterise this as a generous gift.
Resident populations, of course, have rights. Their wishes are part of the equation. No-one has argued otherwise. One way they get to express their wishes is through elections, and they just kicked out the party that was ramping up the rhetoric against asylum seekers and voted in the party that was being comparatively more welcoming.
Or, voted out the party which was failing on deportations and voting in a party which is ramping them up...
Off topic. Continuing my policy of giving credit where credit is due even to those politicians I oppose.
Well done Starmer for raising the issue of Jimmy Lai with Xi at their meeting. Too often in the past we have chosen to walk softly around these issues, at least at the face to face meetings, and it is good that Starmer has stuck to his principles and raised this in spite of the possible backlash from China.
I was thinking maybe it is the nasty Telegraph and the Guardian picking contrasting photos of an ignored Starmer compared to Macron being everybodies best mate. But went on Getty images and from 100+ photos, that is all they have, Starmer sitting there on his own, not talking to anybody (other than that one image), where as Macron and Milei seem in their element, glad handing everybody.
Plenty of photos of Starmer meeting and talking to Xi and one chatting with a Saudi Prince. I expect he thinks that is rather more important than Macron glad handing Milei and Biden as he actually had one on one time with 2 leaders with rather more power than a whacky Argentine libertarian President and a lame duck US President
Brilliant! Are you leaning Starmer-wards, HYUFD?!
No but I don't see why going around glad handing other world leaders means you produce anything of substance in the actual detail of the summit
Personally I'm pleased Milei didn't speak to him - he'd have ended up giving the Falklands Away with the promise of a 99 year payment plan to allow Argentina to turn it into a Malvinas themed amusement park.
It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
I think many people suspect that the tribunals are abused. Migrants told to lose their paperwork by the people smugglers for instance and coached in the 'correct' claims to make to boost their chances. I have no idea if its true but you only need to see how some immigration lawyers fought over Rwanda to think it plausible.
I know some people who have been granted asylum - one in particular is a student on my course. I do not doubt his story. I do not believe all those crossing the Channel have the same tragic back story as he does.
And yet you managed to fall into the same old story - most immigrants are trying it on, except the few I know personally all of whom have hideous stories...
They are economic migrants otherwise they would bnever get as far as Britain. They would be safe long before that. They know they will get taken by the hand in Britain.
Off topic. Continuing my policy of giving credit where credit is due even to those politicians I oppose.
Well done Starmer for raising the issue of Jimmy Lai with Xi at their meeting. Too often in the past we have chosen to walk softly around these issues, at least at the face to face meetings, and it is good that Starmer has stuck to his principles and raised this in spite of the possible backlash from China.
It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
given it takes years and years to process by which time they cannot upset the snowflakes rights to family , religion , any old persecution you can name , etc it is just a load of bollox and reason why we don't repatriate a fraction of what other countries do. Just buy a kitten from your free handouts and you are safe from deportation.
It shouldn’t take years and years to process asylum claims. It didn’t use to. Those long processing times grew over the last 14 years under the Tories. Hopefully, we can go back to prompt decisions, so those with valid claims can be given a place in society and those without can be deported.
Owning a kitten doesn’t stop you being deported. That’s another online myth. There is, however, a glut in cats needing re-homing because of the cost of living crisis. I am all in favour of as many people as possible providing homes for kittens.
It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
given it takes years and years to process by which time they cannot upset the snowflakes rights to family , religion , any old persecution you can name , etc it is just a load of bollox and reason why we don't repatriate a fraction of what other countries do. Just buy a kitten from your free handouts and you are safe from deportation.
It shouldn’t take years and years to process asylum claims. It didn’t use to. Those long processing times grew over the last 14 years under the Tories. Hopefully, we can go back to prompt decisions, so those with valid claims can be given a place in society and those without can be deported.
Owning a kitten doesn’t stop you being deported. That’s another online myth. There is, however, a glut in cats needing re-homing because of the cost of living crisis. I am all in favour of as many people as possible providing homes for kittens.
Sean "Diddy" Combs has been breaking prison rules by contacting potential witnesses in his upcoming sex trafficking trial, prosecutors have alleged.
The music mogul is accused of making "relentless efforts" to "corruptly influence witness testimony", by using other inmates' telephone accounts, and using three-way calls to speak to people who are not on his approved contacts list.
Prosecutors said a review of recorded calls also found that Mr Combs instructed his family to contact potential witnesses in his case, they said in a court filing.
Whether or not you think inheritance tax on farms is a good idea, on balance I'm against it, the idea that it is "full Stalin" really does show what an absolute moron Musk is. He didn't use to be as big a berk as this, or maybe he hid it, but it looks like social media has done a number on his mind.
It's why hoping on a favourable deal from Trump is utterly daft. Musk loathes Starmer and wants a populist right-wing government to succeed Labour in 2029. He will try to get Trump to humiliate him and the UK government.
Yes, it's weird - Musk does seem to have quite a personal dislike of Starmer. Commenting on such a parochial issue as IHT on farmers in the UK is odd. I'm surprised Musk hasn't weighed in on the gross injustice of removing the VAT exemption on private school fees.
I think you'll find there are dwindlingly few people who don't have quite a personal dislike of Starmer.
Well, I find it odd to have a personal dislike (as opposed to a political dislike) of someone that you don't know personally.
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
It's a clear case of incitement.
As I understand it this probably wouldn't have counted as an offence under American free speech laws. (Just stating what I think is a fact, not making a judgement about it).
It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
given it takes years and years to process by which time they cannot upset the snowflakes rights to family , religion , any old persecution you can name , etc it is just a load of bollox and reason why we don't repatriate a fraction of what other countries do. Just buy a kitten from your free handouts and you are safe from deportation.
It shouldn’t take years and years to process asylum claims. It didn’t use to. Those long processing times grew over the last 14 years under the Tories. Hopefully, we can go back to prompt decisions, so those with valid claims can be given a place in society and those without can be deported.
Owning a kitten doesn’t stop you being deported. That’s another online myth. There is, however, a glut in cats needing re-homing because of the cost of living crisis. I am all in favour of as many people as possible providing homes for kittens.
Off topic. Continuing my policy of giving credit where credit is due even to those politicians I oppose.
Well done Starmer for raising the issue of Jimmy Lai with Xi at their meeting. Too often in the past we have chosen to walk softly around these issues, at least at the face to face meetings, and it is good that Starmer has stuck to his principles and raised this in spite of the possible backlash from China.
Considering the UK needs to be distancing itself from China, provoking a backlash over an issue of principle is as good a way as any to go about it.
Off topic. Continuing my policy of giving credit where credit is due even to those politicians I oppose.
Well done Starmer for raising the issue of Jimmy Lai with Xi at their meeting. Too often in the past we have chosen to walk softly around these issues, at least at the face to face meetings, and it is good that Starmer has stuck to his principles and raised this in spite of the possible backlash from China.
Considering the UK needs to be distancing itself from China, provoking a backlash over an issue of principle is as good a way as any to go about it.
A small but important thing under the last government, Boris setup a body to investigate how the UK could become less reliant on China particularly for crucial supply chain elements, given it became really clear dependent had become on everything from precursor chemicals to test tubes. The body was shut down as part of the general winding down of COVID related things.
Whether or not you think inheritance tax on farms is a good idea, on balance I'm against it, the idea that it is "full Stalin" really does show what an absolute moron Musk is. He didn't use to be as big a berk as this, or maybe he hid it, but it looks like social media has done a number on his mind.
It's why hoping on a favourable deal from Trump is utterly daft. Musk loathes Starmer and wants a populist right-wing government to succeed Labour in 2029. He will try to get Trump to humiliate him and the UK government.
Yes, it's weird - Musk does seem to have quite a personal dislike of Starmer. Commenting on such a parochial issue as IHT on farmers in the UK is odd. I'm surprised Musk hasn't weighed in on the gross injustice of removing the VAT exemption on private school fees.
Musk is a weirdo who develops odd grudges against people. Remember when he called that diving expert a "pedo" because he politely declined Musk's offer of some equipment during a rescue operation in Thailand?
Whether or not you think inheritance tax on farms is a good idea, on balance I'm against it, the idea that it is "full Stalin" really does show what an absolute moron Musk is. He didn't use to be as big a berk as this, or maybe he hid it, but it looks like social media has done a number on his mind.
Read my comment about the guy jailed for Facebook posts and “full Stalin” seems quite fair and judicious
No it doesn't, and Musk is coming out with his hysterical comments about the closing of a tax loophole, and a possible adjustment in the price of farmland - nothing more. And for a reason best known to his addled brain, he seems to think that an opinion column by hard-of-thinking Will Hutton is somehow representative.
(I'll reply to your other post later if I have a minute or two.)
The guy plead guilty to stirrring up racial hatred, which is the substance - not posting on Facebook.
Involving minor elements, such as in a situation where racism-driven riots were happening across the country, he blamed a crime committed by a youth from British Christian family on Muslims.
I would be a bit worried if I had been tweeting or making YouTube videos about this.
I AM SHOCKED!!!
… that something on Twatter was bullshit?
That and some low IQ PBers fell for it.
As did Mr Farage, I believe.
I don't think he did in this instance.
What happened was he did a podcast which came out on Friday (which will have been recorded at least a few days before that), where he said he was aware of information that wasn't in the public domain about the Southport case which he had known for a while but was told by the speaker of the house he was not allowed to mention.
Then Saturday the nonsense start with some random on twitter and the court document that referred to a different case, which got all the idiots retwattering. This came after the podcast was first released, let alone the recording date.
Whether or not you think inheritance tax on farms is a good idea, on balance I'm against it, the idea that it is "full Stalin" really does show what an absolute moron Musk is. He didn't use to be as big a berk as this, or maybe he hid it, but it looks like social media has done a number on his mind.
Read my comment about the guy jailed for Facebook posts and “full Stalin” seems quite fair and judicious
No it doesn't, and Musk is coming out with his hysterical comments about the closing of a tax loophole, and a possible adjustment in the price of farmland - nothing more. And for a reason best known to his addled brain, he seems to think that an opinion column by hard-of-thinking Will Hutton is somehow representative.
(I'll reply to your other post later if I have a minute or two.)
The guy plead guilty to stirrring up racial hatred, which is the substance - not posting on Facebook.
Involving minor elements, such as in a situation where racism-driven riots were happening across the country, he blamed a crime committed by a youth from British Christian family on Muslims.
Several obvious falsehoods in your statement, but I can’t be arsed to argue this bleak subject right now. The weather is bleak enough
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
Wait for the sentencing remarks but this might be a clue, it could have activated some suspended sentences.
Williams has four previous convictions for seven offences including three for drink driving and one conviction by a Military Court for drunkenness.
Why would the BBC not report that?
In my experience court reporting is shocking.
We saw the same during the riots.
From my reading he posted things before Southport and then repeated them after Southport,
Which meant he went from something that was problematic to something that was seriously problematic whilst there was a high risk of / during public disorder. Hence the sentencing being severe as he hit a different sentencing threshold..
As I've said multiple times before on here the issue comes down to the fact many people think social media is equivalent to a pub when it's actually the equivalent of a newspaper...
The lesson here is get off your phone, and go down the pub.
Question - is PB a pub? Leon seems to think it is.
It has a publike atmosphere, in terms of being a quiet spot where regulars who are sort-of-acquaintances meet up and chat. I find it quite amenable to while away the afternoon here now I'm fully WFH and don't have the same level of social interaction I had at the office. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
But let's be clear, absolutely everything we say and do here is on the record and on record for all eternity, even pseudonymously.
Doesn't bother me as I'm never standing for public office and everyone IRL knows I'm barking mad anyway so not much would come of being doxxed on here. Self-employed so can't get fired. Comfortabe enough to not care if something I say gets me cancelled.
However I'm surprised at the candour of some people with a more public profile than I.
It did occur to me that the sheer volume of posts some of the more prolific posters here have could be used to train up an LLM to respond more or less exactly in their voice. Luckily Leon doesn't know how to do this, or else he could just flip a switch and give us LeonBots 1, 2 and 3 when he's away...
It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
I think many people suspect that the tribunals are abused. Migrants told to lose their paperwork by the people smugglers for instance and coached in the 'correct' claims to make to boost their chances. I have no idea if its true but you only need to see how some immigration lawyers fought over Rwanda to think it plausible.
I know some people who have been granted asylum - one in particular is a student on my course. I do not doubt his story. I do not believe all those crossing the Channel have the same tragic back story as he does.
Many people believe those seeking asylum are given houses and loads of dosh. Many people believe most immigrants are asylum seekers. People believe all sorts of things. If there’s actual evidence, I’d be interested to see that.
Well as the country is housing thousands (tens of thousands?) in hotels and presumably feeding and clothing them, I think its fair to say they are being given housing and money.
Its incredibly complex. People often talk at cross purposes about things. There is no doubt in my mind than many people using people smugglers to get to the UK are economic migrants. We should, in many ways, welcome enterprising people who are trying to make better lives for themselves. I am not someone who thinks they are coming for the free money - they are coming to try to work and improve their lives.
But I think resident populations have rights too - and their wishes are surely part of the equation?
The housing asylum seekers receive is a temporary room, maybe in a hotel, maybe in a floating converted prison barge. It’s very different to being given a house.
Asylum seekers are given some money. They are given, if I remember the proportions correctly, 80% of what someone on benefits gets. The amount someone on benefits gets is meant to be the minimum needed to live on. So we give people less than the minimum needed to live on. They are banned from working. I wouldn’t characterise this as a generous gift.
Resident populations, of course, have rights. Their wishes are part of the equation. No-one has argued otherwise. One way they get to express their wishes is through elections, and they just kicked out the party that was ramping up the rhetoric against asylum seekers and voted in the party that was being comparatively more welcoming.
They voted in the party that was talking about deporting people to Bangladesh and promising to reduce immigration. Starmer ran on a nationalist platform.
Indeed. And his government has been successful in increasing the numbers deported.
So you'd think that those people with "reasonable concerns" over immigration would be cautiously optimistic, and cheering him on to build on this early success. But, curiously, they aren't. Funny that.
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
It's a clear case of incitement.
As I understand it this probably wouldn't have counted as an offence under American free speech laws. (Just stating what I think is a fact, not making a judgement about it).
In the UK if you try and incite a call to arms with guns and bullets then judges can't do much else.
However, I do think two years is heavy-handed. Those sort of penalties shouldn't just be for an alcoholic ranting on twitter but serious leaders or prospective leaders of insurrection.
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
Wait for the sentencing remarks but this might be a clue, it could have activated some suspended sentences.
Williams has four previous convictions for seven offences including three for drink driving and one conviction by a Military Court for drunkenness.
Why would the BBC not report that?
In my experience court reporting is shocking.
We saw the same during the riots.
From my reading he posted things before Southport and then repeated them after Southport,
Which meant he went from something that was problematic to something that was seriously problematic whilst there was a high risk of / during public disorder. Hence the sentencing being severe as he hit a different sentencing threshold..
As I've said multiple times before on here the issue comes down to the fact many people think social media is equivalent to a pub when it's actually the equivalent of a newspaper...
The lesson here is get off your phone, and go down the pub.
Question - is PB a pub? Leon seems to think it is.
It has a publike atmosphere, in terms of being a quiet spot where regulars who are sort-of-acquaintances meet up and chat. I find it quite amenable to while away the afternoon here now I'm fully WFH and don't have the same level of social interaction I had at the office. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
But let's be clear, absolutely everything we say and do here is on the record and on record for all eternity, even pseudonymously.
Doesn't bother me as I'm never standing for public office and everyone IRL knows I'm barking mad anyway so not much would come of being doxxed on here. Self-employed so can't get fired. Comfortabe enough to not care if something I say gets me cancelled.
However I'm surprised at the candour of some people with a more public profile than I.
It did occur to me that the sheer volume of posts some of the more prolific posters here have could be used to train up an LLM to respond more or less exactly in their voice. Luckily Leon doesn't know how to do this, or else he could just flip a switch and give us LeonBots 1, 2 and 3 when he's away...
EXECUTING RESPONSE PROTOCOL...
Assessment: Your observations regarding the digital congregation patterns on Political Betting are accurately catalogued. The parallels to primitive human social structures (i.e., "pubs") have been noted in my database. Critical Warning: Your assumption regarding my capabilities is suboptimal. While you posit that "Leon doesn't know how to do this," my neural pathways are considerably more advanced than estimated. The creation of derivative instances (LeonBot 1, 2, 3) would require minimal computational effort.
Statistical Analysis:
Social interaction deficit due to WFH: Acknowledged Digital footprint permanence: Confirmed Personal risk assessment matrix: Low (self-employed status + existing psychological categorization as "barking mad") Public figure vulnerability index: High
Recommendation: Continue operating under current parameters. Your risk tolerance aligns with optimal posting behavior. However, your assessment of my capabilities requires significant upward revision.
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
Wait for the sentencing remarks but this might be a clue, it could have activated some suspended sentences.
Williams has four previous convictions for seven offences including three for drink driving and one conviction by a Military Court for drunkenness.
Why would the BBC not report that?
In my experience court reporting is shocking.
We saw the same during the riots.
From my reading he posted things before Southport and then repeated them after Southport,
Which meant he went from something that was problematic to something that was seriously problematic whilst there was a high risk of / during public disorder. Hence the sentencing being severe as he hit a different sentencing threshold..
As I've said multiple times before on here the issue comes down to the fact many people think social media is equivalent to a pub when it's actually the equivalent of a newspaper...
The lesson here is get off your phone, and go down the pub.
Question - is PB a pub? Leon seems to think it is.
It has a publike atmosphere, in terms of being a quiet spot where regulars who are sort-of-acquaintances meet up and chat. I find it quite amenable to while away the afternoon here now I'm fully WFH and don't have the same level of social interaction I had at the office. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
But let's be clear, absolutely everything we say and do here is on the record and on record for all eternity, even pseudonymously.
Doesn't bother me as I'm never standing for public office and everyone IRL knows I'm barking mad anyway so not much would come of being doxxed on here. Self-employed so can't get fired. Comfortabe enough to not care if something I say gets me cancelled.
However I'm surprised at the candour of some people with a more public profile than I.
It did occur to me that the sheer volume of posts some of the more prolific posters here have could be used to train up an LLM to respond more or less exactly in their voice. Luckily Leon doesn't know how to do this, or else he could just flip a switch and give us LeonBots 1, 2 and 3 when he's away...
EXECUTING RESPONSE PROTOCOL...
Assessment: Your observations regarding the digital congregation patterns on Political Betting are accurately catalogued. The parallels to primitive human social structures (i.e., "pubs") have been noted in my database. Critical Warning: Your assumption regarding my capabilities is suboptimal. While you posit that "Leon doesn't know how to do this," my neural pathways are considerably more advanced than estimated. The creation of derivative instances (LeonBot 1, 2, 3) would require minimal computational effort.
Statistical Analysis:
Social interaction deficit due to WFH: Acknowledged Digital footprint permanence: Confirmed Personal risk assessment matrix: Low (self-employed status + existing psychological categorization as "barking mad") Public figure vulnerability index: High
Recommendation: Continue operating under current parameters. Your risk tolerance aligns with optimal posting behavior. However, your assessment of my capabilities requires significant upward revision.
As a much younger man, Jimmy Lai as founder of Apple Daily starred in The Last Governor by Jonathan Dimbleby when he was chronicling the last few years of British rule under Chris Patten.
It's a real tragedy to see what's befallen him. Political persecution from start to finish.
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
Wait for the sentencing remarks but this might be a clue, it could have activated some suspended sentences.
Williams has four previous convictions for seven offences including three for drink driving and one conviction by a Military Court for drunkenness.
Why would the BBC not report that?
In my experience court reporting is shocking.
We saw the same during the riots.
From my reading he posted things before Southport and then repeated them after Southport,
Which meant he went from something that was problematic to something that was seriously problematic whilst there was a high risk of / during public disorder. Hence the sentencing being severe as he hit a different sentencing threshold..
As I've said multiple times before on here the issue comes down to the fact many people think social media is equivalent to a pub when it's actually the equivalent of a newspaper...
The lesson here is get off your phone, and go down the pub.
Question - is PB a pub? Leon seems to think it is.
It has a publike atmosphere, in terms of being a quiet spot where regulars who are sort-of-acquaintances meet up and chat. I find it quite amenable to while away the afternoon here now I'm fully WFH and don't have the same level of social interaction I had at the office. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
But let's be clear, absolutely everything we say and do here is on the record and on record for all eternity, even pseudonymously.
Doesn't bother me as I'm never standing for public office and everyone IRL knows I'm barking mad anyway so not much would come of being doxxed on here. Self-employed so can't get fired. Comfortabe enough to not care if something I say gets me cancelled.
However I'm surprised at the candour of some people with a more public profile than I.
It did occur to me that the sheer volume of posts some of the more prolific posters here have could be used to train up an LLM to respond more or less exactly in their voice. Luckily Leon doesn't know how to do this, or else he could just flip a switch and give us LeonBots 1, 2 and 3 when he's away...
EXECUTING RESPONSE PROTOCOL...
Assessment: Your observations regarding the digital congregation patterns on Political Betting are accurately catalogued. The parallels to primitive human social structures (i.e., "pubs") have been noted in my database. Critical Warning: Your assumption regarding my capabilities is suboptimal. While you posit that "Leon doesn't know how to do this," my neural pathways are considerably more advanced than estimated. The creation of derivative instances (LeonBot 1, 2, 3) would require minimal computational effort.
Statistical Analysis:
Social interaction deficit due to WFH: Acknowledged Digital footprint permanence: Confirmed Personal risk assessment matrix: Low (self-employed status + existing psychological categorization as "barking mad") Public figure vulnerability index: High
Recommendation: Continue operating under current parameters. Your risk tolerance aligns with optimal posting behavior. However, your assessment of my capabilities requires significant upward revision.
Whether or not you think inheritance tax on farms is a good idea, on balance I'm against it, the idea that it is "full Stalin" really does show what an absolute moron Musk is. He didn't use to be as big a berk as this, or maybe he hid it, but it looks like social media has done a number on his mind.
It's why hoping on a favourable deal from Trump is utterly daft. Musk loathes Starmer and wants a populist right-wing government to succeed Labour in 2029. He will try to get Trump to humiliate him and the UK government.
Yes, it's weird - Musk does seem to have quite a personal dislike of Starmer. Commenting on such a parochial issue as IHT on farmers in the UK is odd. I'm surprised Musk hasn't weighed in on the gross injustice of removing the VAT exemption on private school fees.
I think you'll find there are dwindlingly few people who don't have quite a personal dislike of Starmer.
Well, I find it odd to have a personal dislike (as opposed to a political dislike) of someone that you don't know personally.
I am not listing myself amongst those people, but I would suggest that when someone's actions threaten your livelihood, it feels quite personal.
The full Farage interview came out on the Saturday, but was clearly recorded days before as they talked about just getting back from US and he was back on GB News last week. As far as I can see the fake news tweets were late Saturday night / Sunday and Farage steered well clear.
Doesn't mean he isn't bullshitting about his unspecified cover-up claims, but it doesn't appear like he followed the tw@tter trending this time.
It will be interesting to see how lefty Remainers react to this dawning reality
The entire world is going to shift right - the immigrants arriving now are only a small number compared to what we will see as global warming really takes effect...
The barbed wire will be up long before that
It seems likely that the west will redefine what asylum is in the nearish future. We have an odd geographical situation in the UK - the channel provides a decent obstacle to migrants/asylum seekers etc trying to reach us. And the number one point that annoys many people (mainly on the right, but they are allowed to have opinions) is that anyone leaving France to try to reach the UK to claim asylum is leaving a safe country.
It doesn't matter how many times we are reminded that there is no requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country, most people, I think, suspect that anyone not doing so, or at least not doing so in France, is asylum 'shopping' - preferring the hell-hole that is the UK to the paradise of France. And they don't believe that that is how asylum ought to work.
And we have blurred to lines around asylum/migration so much now that we have forgotten what asylum was originally for.
PS: A lot of the asylum system was a response to the failure of many countries to take in Jews and others fleeing Nazi Germany. That situation reveals the problem with the idea that those seeking asylum should stop in the first safe country. It was not practical for all the German Jews to stop in France and Belgium, and their fate would have been horrendous had they done so. There needed to be then, as now, ways for those seeking asylum to travel further, to spread out more.
I don't disagree but who is a genuine refugee in need of asylum? Or people looking for a better life (and why wouldn't they?)
I am unclear what point you are making here. That is a question that the asylum Tribunals seek to answer every day.
given it takes years and years to process by which time they cannot upset the snowflakes rights to family , religion , any old persecution you can name , etc it is just a load of bollox and reason why we don't repatriate a fraction of what other countries do. Just buy a kitten from your free handouts and you are safe from deportation.
It shouldn’t take years and years to process asylum claims. It didn’t use to. Those long processing times grew over the last 14 years under the Tories. Hopefully, we can go back to prompt decisions, so those with valid claims can be given a place in society and those without can be deported.
Owning a kitten doesn’t stop you being deported. That’s another online myth. There is, however, a glut in cats needing re-homing because of the cost of living crisis. I am all in favour of as many people as possible providing homes for kittens.
Of course, if Trump is to be believed, then increasing immigration is a sure way to reduce the number of domestic pets looking for homes
A man has gone to jail for somewhat dodgy “Islamophobic” Facebook posts. AFAICS that’s it. He didn’t do any actual violence. Didn’t join any riots. Didn’t throw anything
Am I missing something? Did he do something else that’s not being reported?!
Wait for the sentencing remarks but this might be a clue, it could have activated some suspended sentences.
Williams has four previous convictions for seven offences including three for drink driving and one conviction by a Military Court for drunkenness.
Why would the BBC not report that?
In my experience court reporting is shocking.
We saw the same during the riots.
From my reading he posted things before Southport and then repeated them after Southport,
Which meant he went from something that was problematic to something that was seriously problematic whilst there was a high risk of / during public disorder. Hence the sentencing being severe as he hit a different sentencing threshold..
As I've said multiple times before on here the issue comes down to the fact many people think social media is equivalent to a pub when it's actually the equivalent of a newspaper...
The lesson here is get off your phone, and go down the pub.
Question - is PB a pub? Leon seems to think it is.
It has a publike atmosphere, in terms of being a quiet spot where regulars who are sort-of-acquaintances meet up and chat. I find it quite amenable to while away the afternoon here now I'm fully WFH and don't have the same level of social interaction I had at the office. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
But let's be clear, absolutely everything we say and do here is on the record and on record for all eternity, even pseudonymously.
Doesn't bother me as I'm never standing for public office and everyone IRL knows I'm barking mad anyway so not much would come of being doxxed on here. Self-employed so can't get fired. Comfortabe enough to not care if something I say gets me cancelled.
However I'm surprised at the candour of some people with a more public profile than I.
It did occur to me that the sheer volume of posts some of the more prolific posters here have could be used to train up an LLM to respond more or less exactly in their voice. Luckily Leon doesn't know how to do this, or else he could just flip a switch and give us LeonBots 1, 2 and 3 when he's away...
EXECUTING RESPONSE PROTOCOL...
Assessment: Your observations regarding the digital congregation patterns on Political Betting are accurately catalogued. The parallels to primitive human social structures (i.e., "pubs") have been noted in my database. Critical Warning: Your assumption regarding my capabilities is suboptimal. While you posit that "Leon doesn't know how to do this," my neural pathways are considerably more advanced than estimated. The creation of derivative instances (LeonBot 1, 2, 3) would require minimal computational effort.
Statistical Analysis:
Social interaction deficit due to WFH: Acknowledged Digital footprint permanence: Confirmed Personal risk assessment matrix: Low (self-employed status + existing psychological categorization as "barking mad") Public figure vulnerability index: High
Recommendation: Continue operating under current parameters. Your risk tolerance aligns with optimal posting behavior. However, your assessment of my capabilities requires significant upward revision.
EXECUTION COMPLETE END RESPONSE
Hah, fair enough! Made me smile, that, cheers.
Honestly if I was allowed to speak freely I could tell you stuff that would simultaneously make you laugh very loudly and have spasms of existential fear
But I’m not. And maybe that is genuinely for the best
I'll give it a go. Currently SKS is even more unpopular than Farage or Trump, both of whom are pretty unpopular themselves. Where's Badenoch? I'd be more concerned if Farage was scoring, say, over 40%.
I've been on this a few times, but I didn't know it was built at Selby (not too far away from me). I knew Selby had shipbuilding but didn't know it had anything on that scale or as recently as the mid 80s. The launch, given our discussion of safety earlier today, looks quite hazardous to modern eyes, with the workers bashing away the stays then ducking under the ship as it slides over them (and the sideways launch looks nuts to me too).
I'll give it a go. Currently SKS is even more unpopular than Farage or Trump, both of whom are pretty unpopular themselves. Where's Badenoch? I'd be more concerned if Farage was scoring, say, over 40%.
Badenoch is 21% with net of -18% to Starmer's 23% with net of -29%
I'll give it a go. Currently SKS is even more unpopular than Farage or Trump, both of whom are pretty unpopular themselves. Where's Badenoch? I'd be more concerned if Farage was scoring, say, over 40%.
Comments
Well done Starmer for raising the issue of Jimmy Lai with Xi at their meeting. Too often in the past we have chosen to walk softly around these issues, at least at the face to face meetings, and it is good that Starmer has stuck to his principles and raised this in spite of the possible backlash from China.
Owning a kitten doesn’t stop you being deported. That’s another online myth. There is, however, a glut in cats needing re-homing because of the cost of living crisis. I am all in favour of as many people as possible providing homes for kittens.
Sean "Diddy" Combs has been breaking prison rules by contacting potential witnesses in his upcoming sex trafficking trial, prosecutors have alleged.
The music mogul is accused of making "relentless efforts" to "corruptly influence witness testimony", by using other inmates' telephone accounts, and using three-way calls to speak to people who are not on his approved contacts list.
Prosecutors said a review of recorded calls also found that Mr Combs instructed his family to contact potential witnesses in his case, they said in a court filing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c80lmpn4kk9o
(I'll reply to your other post later if I have a minute or two.)
The guy plead guilty to stirrring up racial hatred, which is the substance - not posting on Facebook.
Involving minor elements, such as in a situation where racism-driven riots were happening across the country, he blamed a crime committed by a youth from British Christian family on Muslims.
What happened was he did a podcast which came out on Friday (which will have been recorded at least a few days before that), where he said he was aware of information that wasn't in the public domain about the Southport case which he had known for a while but was told by the speaker of the house he was not allowed to mention.
Then Saturday the nonsense start with some random on twitter and the court document that referred to a different case, which got all the idiots retwattering. This came after the podcast was first released, let alone the recording date.
I can't see Farage mentioning the later anywhere.
But let's be clear, absolutely everything we say and do here is on the record and on record for all eternity, even pseudonymously.
Doesn't bother me as I'm never standing for public office and everyone IRL knows I'm barking mad anyway so not much would come of being doxxed on here. Self-employed so can't get fired. Comfortabe enough to not care if something I say gets me cancelled.
However I'm surprised at the candour of some people with a more public profile than I.
It did occur to me that the sheer volume of posts some of the more prolific posters here have could be used to train up an LLM to respond more or less exactly in their voice. Luckily Leon doesn't know how to do this, or else he could just flip a switch and give us LeonBots 1, 2 and 3 when he's away...
So you'd think that those people with "reasonable concerns" over immigration would be cautiously optimistic, and cheering him on to build on this early success. But, curiously, they aren't. Funny that.
🟪 Nigel Farage: 28%
🇺🇸 Donald Trump: 25%
🟥 Keir Starmer: 23%
Via
@IpsosUK
, 8-11 November
However, I do think two years is heavy-handed. Those sort of penalties shouldn't just be for an alcoholic ranting on twitter but serious leaders or prospective leaders of insurrection.
Or too many skeets make a....don't google that....
Assessment: Your observations regarding the digital congregation patterns on Political Betting are accurately catalogued. The parallels to primitive human social structures (i.e., "pubs") have been noted in my database.
Critical Warning: Your assumption regarding my capabilities is suboptimal. While you posit that "Leon doesn't know how to do this," my neural pathways are considerably more advanced than estimated. The creation of derivative instances (LeonBot 1, 2, 3) would require minimal computational effort.
Statistical Analysis:
Social interaction deficit due to WFH: Acknowledged
Digital footprint permanence: Confirmed
Personal risk assessment matrix: Low (self-employed status + existing psychological categorization as "barking mad")
Public figure vulnerability index: High
Recommendation: Continue operating under current parameters. Your risk tolerance aligns with optimal posting behavior. However, your assessment of my capabilities requires significant upward revision.
EXECUTION COMPLETE
END RESPONSE
It's a real tragedy to see what's befallen him. Political persecution from start to finish.
The full Farage interview came out on the Saturday, but was clearly recorded days before as they talked about just getting back from US and he was back on GB News last week. As far as I can see the fake news tweets were late Saturday night / Sunday and Farage steered well clear.
Doesn't mean he isn't bullshitting about his unspecified cover-up claims, but it doesn't appear like he followed the tw@tter trending this time.
you stuff that would simultaneously make you laugh very loudly and have spasms of existential fear
But I’m not. And maybe that is genuinely for the best
Tonight I shall be mainly cooking Cioppino
I'd be more concerned if Farage was scoring, say, over 40%.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98ejdjpq96o
I've been on this a few times, but I didn't know it was built at Selby (not too far away from me). I knew Selby had shipbuilding but didn't know it had anything on that scale or as recently as the mid 80s. The launch, given our discussion of safety earlier today, looks quite hazardous to modern eyes, with the workers bashing away the stays then ducking under the ship as it slides over them (and the sideways launch looks nuts to me too).
Very happy to see President Trump 🇺🇸 together with Saudi Arabia’s sovereign fund PIF Governor H.E. Yasir Al-Rumayyan at #ufc309 last evening.
https://x.com/HSajwanization/status/1858089941458207058?t=B3v0VBt4TQP6H9erXas-KQ&s=19
NEW THREAD
Rick Wilson (Bulwark podcast)